Skip to content

🍒 Cherry pick PR #97003 to staging 🍒#97007

Merged
yuwenmemon merged 3 commits into
stagingfrom
cherry-pick-staging-97003-30125181995-1
Jul 24, 2026
Merged

🍒 Cherry pick PR #97003 to staging 🍒#97007
yuwenmemon merged 3 commits into
stagingfrom
cherry-pick-staging-97003-30125181995-1

Conversation

@os-botify

@os-botify os-botify Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🍒 Cherry pick #97003 to staging 🍒

This PR had conflicts when we tried to cherry-pick it to staging. You'll need to manually perform the cherry-pick, using the following steps:

git fetch
git checkout cherry-pick-staging-97003-30125181995-1
git cherry-pick -S -x --mainline 1 b3e7147d1ffbc7d4b8f001e49e3b523a1a924645

Then manually resolve conflicts, and commit the change with git cherry-pick --continue. Lastly, please run:

git commit --amend -m "$(git log -1 --pretty=%B)" -m "(cherry-picked to staging by yuwenmemon)"

This last part is important. It will help us keep track of who triggered this CP, and will ensure that version bumps are tracked correctly. Once all that's done, push your changes with git push origin cherry-pick-staging-97003-30125181995-1, and then open this PR for review.

Note that you must test this PR, and both the author and reviewer checklist should be completed, just as if you were merging the PR to main.

Important

This PR should ideally be merged by a member of the mobile-deployers team. If it is merged by someone who is not a deployer, the staging deploy triggered by the merge will fail and will need to be manually re-triggered (not just retried) via the deploy workflow.

Pro-tip: If this PR appears to have conflicts against the staging base, it means that the version on staging has been updated. The easiest thing to do if you see this is to close the PR and re-run the CP.

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
    • The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
    • The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

OSBotify added 2 commits July 24, 2026 20:48
(cherry picked from commit 3aaff28)

(cherry-picked to staging by yuwenmemon)
@os-botify
os-botify Bot requested a review from a team as a code owner July 24, 2026 20:48
@os-botify os-botify Bot added Engineering Hourly KSv2 CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging labels Jul 24, 2026
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from Gonals and removed request for a team July 24, 2026 20:49
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 24, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@Gonals Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Julesssss
Julesssss previously approved these changes Jul 24, 2026

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5cf46f87bd

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread package.json
{
"name": "new.expensify",
"version": "9.4.44-5",
"version": "9.4.44-6",

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Cherry-pick the revert before bumping staging

At this bump to 9.4.44-6, the commit is supposed to cherry-pick #97003's deploy-blocker revert, but the diff against the parent only changes version metadata and the Mobile-Expensify gitlink. The App-side revert is still absent in this tree (MoneyRequestReportView still wraps expense reports with AgentZeroStatusProvider, AgentZeroStatusContext still enables hasServerDrivenStatus, and ReportActionsListTailIndicator.tsx still exists), so deploying this version to staging will not remove the Concierge thinking indicator that the CP is meant to fix.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@Julesssss Julesssss closed this Jul 24, 2026
[CP Staging] Revert server-driven AZ status on expense reports

(cherry picked from commit b3e7147)

(cherry-picked to staging by yuwenmemon)
@yuwenmemon yuwenmemon reopened this Jul 24, 2026
@yuwenmemon
yuwenmemon requested a review from a team as a code owner July 24, 2026 21:10
@Julesssss Julesssss reopened this Jul 24, 2026
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for a team July 24, 2026 21:10
@yuwenmemon
yuwenmemon merged commit c1e9721 into staging Jul 24, 2026
11 of 12 checks passed
@yuwenmemon
yuwenmemon deleted the cherry-pick-staging-97003-30125181995-1 branch July 24, 2026 21:13
@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Cherry-picked to staging by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.4.44-6 🚀

platform result
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Help site review: no changes required

I reviewed the changes in this PR (a cherry-pick of #97003) and no updates are required to the help site files under docs/articles, so I did not create a draft docs PR.

Why: This is a revert of a regression. It undoes server-driven AgentZero/Concierge status behavior on expense reports that caused a "thinking" indicator to flash briefly during unrelated actions (e.g. inviting a member). The diff:

  • Restores the prior expense-report behavior by removing the tail-indicator/provider wrappers.
  • Reverts the ReportActionsListTailIndicator rename back to ReportActionsListHeader.
  • Bumps app version numbers.

None of this adds or changes a documented, user-facing feature, setting, tab, or button, and there is no help article describing this indicator's behavior. It simply returns the UI to its previously-documented state, so the existing help content remains accurate.

If you feel a specific article should be updated anyway, let me know which behavior you'd like documented and I'll draft it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CP Staging marks PRs that have been CP'd to staging Engineering Hourly KSv2

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants