Incorrect Labeling of Workspace Owner in Approval Workflow by nkdengineer · Pull Request #63060 · Expensify/App

nkdengineer · 2025-05-29T15:59:25Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #61304
PROPOSAL: #61304 (comment)

Tests

Logged in as a Workspace owner
Create a workspace
Add the admin, auditor and member
Navigate to more features, Enable "workflows"
Go to "workflow">> "Edit approval Workflow"
Tap the expand arrow under "Approver", observed that the Admin, Auditor and Owner are displayed correctly

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

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
- MacOS: Desktop
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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
- 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  - If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- 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)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
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)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
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 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.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
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

Screen.Recording.2025-05-29.at.22.33.21.mov

MacOS: Desktop

melvin-bot · 2025-05-29T15:59:35Z

@abdulrahuman5196 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]

abdulrahuman5196 · 2025-05-30T14:58:51Z

Hi Will review today

nkdengineer · 2025-06-03T03:05:07Z

@abdulrahuman5196 friendly bump

abdulrahuman5196

@nkdengineer
One change requested. I assume most of the unwanted diff is due to the lint failures. correct me if wrong.

src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx

abdulrahuman5196 · 2025-06-03T17:46:09Z

Kindly also fix merge conflicts

nkdengineer · 2025-06-04T04:58:29Z

I assume most of the unwanted diff is due to the lint failures. correct me if wrong.

That's right.

Kindly also fix merge conflicts

Done!

nkdengineer · 2025-06-06T03:28:19Z

@abdulrahuman5196 Is it good?

nkdengineer · 2025-06-10T03:16:36Z

@abdulrahuman5196 Friendly bump

abdulrahuman5196 · 2025-06-10T08:42:22Z

Checking now

miljakljajic · 2025-06-12T13:16:04Z

@abdulrahuman5196 what are the next steps for this one

abdulrahuman5196 · 2025-06-16T09:32:22Z

Checking now

abdulrahuman5196 · 2025-06-16T16:23:03Z

Reviewer Checklist

I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
- I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
- I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
- I verified the steps cover any possible 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 checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: HybridApp
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: HybridApp
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
- MacOS: Desktop
If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
- 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 shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- 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)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
If a new component is created I verified that:
- A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
- All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
- The file is named correctly
- The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
- The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
- For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
- Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
- All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
- The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
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 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.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this 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.
I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.9.47.26.PM.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.9.49.25.PM.mp4

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.4.10.55.PM.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.4.11.34.PM.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.3.35.55.PM.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-06-16.at.3.39.47.PM.mp4

abdulrahuman5196

Changes looks good and works well. Reviewers checklist is also complete.

All yours. @rafecolton

🎀 👀 🎀
C+ Reviewed

rafecolton

Have a few questions about nullable values

src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx

src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMembersPage.tsx

rafecolton · 2025-06-16T17:29:03Z

src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApproverPage.tsx

-                        rightElement: isAdmin ? <Badge text={translate('common.admin')} /> : undefined,
+                        rightElement: (
+                            <MemberRightIcon
+                                role={employee.role}


I see this was employee?.role before - does it need to be that here as well?

No need to use employee?.role, we used employee.email in this component so I believe it's safe

Not a TS expert but I see .map((employee): SelectionListApprover | null => { which makes me think that the type of each employee is SelectionListApprover | null - so we expect it could be null. We also check for !email right after getting it from employee. So that makes me think that we do need the ? and not using it for employee.email is actually a bug

(employee): SelectionListApprover | null that means the result of the map operation can be null, not the employee. Employee that can't be null, however after convert it to approver, the approver can be null that why we have the logic to remove the null value in here

App/src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApproverPage.tsx

Line 132 in 0686278

.filter((approver): approver is SelectionListApprover => !!approver);

Thank you for explaining about the return value, that makes sense. It's weird that the employee.email and employee?.role were added in the same commit in #46510. Not sure if it was an oversight or there's a specific reason for it - @blazejkustra can you educate me here? 🙏

Probably just an oversight @rafecolton, we had a tight deadline back then 😅

nkdengineer · 2025-06-17T09:18:17Z

@rafecolton I fixed/replied your suggestions above. Thanks

rafecolton · 2025-06-17T19:25:10Z

src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApproverPage.tsx

-                        rightElement: isAdmin ? <Badge text={translate('common.admin')} /> : undefined,
+                        rightElement: (
+                            <MemberRightIcon
+                                role={employee.role}


Not a TS expert but I see .map((employee): SelectionListApprover | null => { which makes me think that the type of each employee is SelectionListApprover | null - so we expect it could be null. We also check for !email right after getting it from employee. So that makes me think that we do need the ? and not using it for employee.email is actually a bug

src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceMembersPage.tsx

nkdengineer · 2025-06-18T04:50:50Z

Replied in here: #63060 (comment)

rafecolton

Approving this, but will wait for @blazejkustra to comment before merging since I would like to understand just a little bit better

rafecolton · 2025-06-18T17:05:50Z

src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApproverPage.tsx

-                        rightElement: isAdmin ? <Badge text={translate('common.admin')} /> : undefined,
+                        rightElement: (
+                            <MemberRightIcon
+                                role={employee.role}


Thank you for explaining about the return value, that makes sense. It's weird that the employee.email and employee?.role were added in the same commit in #46510. Not sure if it was an oversight or there's a specific reason for it - @blazejkustra can you educate me here? 🙏

nkdengineer · 2025-06-23T02:41:32Z

@rafecolton Is the PR good to merge?

blazejkustra · 2025-06-23T07:39:11Z

Sorry, I was out of the office for the last two days of last week. Let me take a look at your question real quick @rafecolton

src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx

blazejkustra · 2025-06-23T07:45:40Z

src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApproverPage.tsx

-                        rightElement: isAdmin ? <Badge text={translate('common.admin')} /> : undefined,
+                        rightElement: (
+                            <MemberRightIcon
+                                role={employee.role}


Probably just an oversight @rafecolton, we had a tight deadline back then 😅

rafecolton · 2025-06-23T13:08:45Z

@nkdengineer please go ahead and implement @blazejkustra's suggestions and we can merge

Co-authored-by: Błażej Kustra <46095609+blazejkustra@users.noreply.github.com>

nkdengineer · 2025-06-24T03:01:20Z

@rafecolton I updated the PR. Thank you!

OSBotify · 2025-06-24T03:29:54Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2025-06-24T19:17:07Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/rafecolton in version: 9.1.71-0 🚀

platform	result
🖥 desktop 🖥	failure ❌
🕸 web 🕸	success ✅
🤖 android 🤖	success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎	failure ❌

github-actions · 2025-06-27T23:10:49Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 9.1.71-11 🚀

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

Incorrect Labeling of Workspace Owner in Approval Workflow

8f2527a

nkdengineer marked this pull request as ready for review May 29, 2025 15:59

nkdengineer requested a review from a team as a code owner May 29, 2025 15:59

melvin-bot bot requested review from abdulrahuman5196 and removed request for a team May 29, 2025 15:59

fix eslint

7f65d6f

abdulrahuman5196 suggested changes Jun 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

nkdengineer added 2 commits June 4, 2025 11:52

fix conflicts

76836cc

refactor MemberRightIcon

be6c4a8

prettier

ab81f0f

abdulrahuman5196 approved these changes Jun 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from rafecolton June 16, 2025 16:24

rafecolton reviewed Jun 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

nkdengineer added 2 commits June 17, 2025 16:04

Merge branch 'main' into fix/61304

c80411f

add owner check

32d304f

rafecolton requested changes Jun 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into fix/61304

eba695c

rafecolton previously approved these changes Jun 18, 2025

View reviewed changes

blazejkustra approved these changes Jun 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

nkdengineer and others added 2 commits June 23, 2025 23:13

Merge branch 'main' into fix/61304

1d3ef0f

Update src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx

6e227b4

Co-authored-by: Błażej Kustra <46095609+blazejkustra@users.noreply.github.com>

nkdengineer dismissed rafecolton’s stale review via 6e227b4 June 23, 2025 16:19

Update src/pages/workspace/MemberRightIcon.tsx

df37e10

Co-authored-by: Błażej Kustra <46095609+blazejkustra@users.noreply.github.com>

rafecolton approved these changes Jun 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

rafecolton merged commit 16a58b5 into Expensify:main Jun 24, 2025
18 checks passed

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-06-24 #64820

Closed

parasharrajat mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2025

[$250] Incorrect role is shown for members in Approver selection list #64262

Closed

16 tasks

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2025

[Due for payment 2025-07-04] [$250] Incorrect Labeling of Workspace Owner in Approval Workflow #61304

Closed

8 tasks

Conversation

nkdengineer commented May 29, 2025

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented May 29, 2025

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 commented May 30, 2025

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 commented Jun 3, 2025

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 4, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 6, 2025

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 10, 2025

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 commented Jun 10, 2025

Uh oh!

miljakljajic commented Jun 12, 2025

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 commented Jun 16, 2025

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 commented Jun 16, 2025

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

abdulrahuman5196 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rafecolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 17, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 18, 2025

Uh oh!

rafecolton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

blazejkustra commented Jun 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rafecolton commented Jun 23, 2025

nkdengineer commented Jun 4, 2025 •

edited

Loading