[Due for payment 2026-03-30] Onboarding - Test drive does not open from FAB

[jponikarchuk]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.3.40-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: #83299
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): sjdoisjndoisjndjnoisj@gmail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Exploratory - Significant User Experience Deterioration
Device used: Mac 26.2 / Chrome
App Component: Other

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Create a new Gmail account.
3. Complete onboarding with Something else intent.
4. Create a workspace.
5. Open FAB > Take a 2-minute test drive.

Expected Result:

Test drive will open.

Actual Result:

Test drive does not open.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: App
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: App
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• iOS: mWeb Chrome
• Windows: Chrome
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screenshots/Videos

Video.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @aimane-chnaif

[melvin-bot]

You have been assigned to this deploy blocker because you recently merged this PR: #83299

[melvin-bot]

💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source

[github-actions]

👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:

1. Identify the pull request that introduced this issue and revert it.
2. Find someone who can quickly fix the issue.
3. Fix the issue yourself.

[OSBotify]

🔍 Investigation Summary

Classification: Frontend bug
Causing PR: #83299 - "FAB popover decomposition" by @TMisiukiewicz (High confidence)
Related Issues: None identified

Recommendation: REVERT

The causing PR is a large refactoring (800+ lines) that decomposed the FAB menu into composable components. Given the complexity of the refactor and the fact that it blocks the test drive feature (a critical onboarding flow), reverting is the safest approach to unblock the deploy.

Labels: No label changes needed - this is a frontend bug, so DeployBlockerCash should remain.

📋 Detailed Analysis

Evidence

• PR FAB popover decomposition #83299 was merged on March 17, 2026 and is included in the 9.3.40-0 staging deploy (position 32 in chronological order)
• The issue is reproducible on staging but NOT on production, confirming it was introduced in this staging cycle
• Melvin-bot automatically assigned this PR as the likely cause
• The PR completely refactored the FloatingActionButtonAndPopover component from a monolithic 800-line file into composable pieces

Verification

The PR modified the following test drive-related files:

• Created: src/pages/inbox/sidebar/FABPopoverContent/menuItems/TestDriveMenuItem.tsx
• Modified: src/pages/inbox/sidebar/FloatingActionButtonAndPopover.tsx (reduced from ~800 to ~90 lines)
• Created new architecture with FABMenuContext, FABPopoverMenu, and FABFocusableMenuItem components

The test drive menu item rendering logic was moved from the monolithic component into a new composable TestDriveMenuItem component.

Root Cause

The refactoring introduced a new event handling architecture using FABMenuContext and FABFocusableMenuItem. The test drive functionality relies on:

1. User clicks the test drive menu item
2. FABFocusableMenuItem calls onItemPress from context
3. Context calls navigateAfterInteraction with the callback
4. Callback executes interceptAnonymousUser(() => startTestDrive(...))
5. startTestDrive navigates to ROUTES.TEST_DRIVE_DEMO_ROOT

The issue appears to be in how the new architecture handles the navigation callback, though without reproducing locally, the exact failure point is unclear. The complexity of the refactor (introducing context, multiple new hooks, and changing the component hierarchy) makes it high-risk for subtle timing or callback issues.

Comparing TestDriveMenuItem to other menu items like ExpenseMenuItem and NewChatMenuItem, the implementation pattern is similar, which suggests the issue may be in the shared infrastructure rather than the specific test drive code.