Add Proactive Review Modal by marcaaron · Pull Request #74880 · Expensify/App

marcaaron · 2025-11-11T22:11:24Z

Hold On Deploys:

Explanation of Change

Adds: Proactive Review Modal
Concierge redirect OR skip behavior
Prompts in-app review on positive feedback

Fixed Issues

$ https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/561663

Tests

Log into a new account and clear initial onboarding prompts.
In a separate window switch to Classic with same account
Make sure you are still logged in on device.
In JS console from separate window trigger: NVP.set('appReview', {trigger: 'test'})
Verify that the device sees a prompt asking if app is enjoyed
Tap outside to "skip" - Verify no comment appears in Concierge DM chat
In JS console clear the NVP NVP.set('appReview', null) and then NVP.set('appReview', {trigger: 'test'}) again
Verify the prompt appears and this time select "No"
Verify a message does appear in the Concierge DM
Repeat NVP step.
Verify prompt and select "Yes".
Verify that in app review prompt shows (iOS and Android native only)
Verify that Concierge DM has a different message asking user what they like about the app.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

❌

QA Steps

Internal QA - Come get me and I will test this.

Test on iOS and Android mainly and verify that these screens show up:

iOS

ANDROID

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

codecov · 2025-11-12T02:01:19Z

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/Expensify.tsx	`86.16% <ø> (ø)`
src/ONYXKEYS.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/components/ProactiveAppReviewModal.tsx	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/API/types.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/components/ProactiveAppReviewModalManager.tsx	`90.00% <90.00%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/StoreReview/index.ts	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
src/hooks/useProactiveAppReview.ts	`38.46% <38.46%> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/User.ts	`24.09% <0.00%> (-1.34%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/StoreReview/index.native.ts	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 4 files with indirect coverage changes

FitseTLT

LGTM

melvin-bot · 2025-12-09T19:01:54Z

@deetergp 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]

melvin-bot · 2025-12-09T19:01:57Z

🎯 @FitseTLT, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

An E/App issue has been created to issue payment here: #77170.

github-actions · 2025-12-09T19:02:19Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, Desktop, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #74880.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
❌ FAILED ❌	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.amazonaws.com/ios/74880/index.html
The QR code can't be generated, because the Android build failed

Desktop 💻	Web 🕸️
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩	⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Desktop was skipped	The build for Web was skipped

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

deetergp

LGTM

deetergp · 2025-12-09T21:27:32Z

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
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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

marcaaron · 2025-12-09T23:09:12Z

Going to send this one! Users won't actually be able to see this yet as the triggers are still disabled in the Auth backend. The flow can only be triggered manually as described in the so there is minimal risk.

melvin-bot · 2025-12-09T23:09:23Z

@marcaaron looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

marcaaron · 2025-12-09T23:10:01Z

The test that was not passing was prettier and unclear why it kept failing as there was no output provided. I do not think it is a blocker.

OSBotify · 2025-12-09T23:37:16Z

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

OSBotify · 2025-12-10T22:05:08Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.2.75-0 🚀

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

marcaaron · 2025-12-10T23:56:38Z

Tested Android on staging and the first modal looks good and the Concierge message appears. The in-app review part did not show. I'm not sure if that's because it's a beta version. I'll test again on production and if it does not work then we'll have to figure out why.

This should not be a blocker for rolling this PR to production as the feature won't be officially enabled for users until we merge this Auth PR.

I'm waiting for the iOS staging build at the moment. So, if everything looks good there I will check this off the staging deploy list.

We will need to test the Android flow again after this PR is deployed. If Android's in app modal still doesn't show on production then we will need to investigate that before merging the Auth PR.

Edit: iOS in app review is not showing up either on staging. If it doesn't show on production then we will know something is wrong. It worked fine on dev. Not sure what else to check. Perhaps @Julesssss can help debug if they've any time to spare.

OSBotify · 2025-12-10T23:58:22Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.2.75-0 🚀

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

Julesssss · 2025-12-11T17:26:25Z

Perhaps @Julesssss can help debug if they've any time to spare.

Sorry I'm about to go OOO. I recall us only getting one chance on an Android use account that has never reviewed the app before. But that iOS was a bit more reliable. Maybe QA could help with this?

marcaaron · 2025-12-11T18:18:24Z

No worries. I'm also going OOO so if this needs to be on HOLD for a bit that seems ok. I will try to test on production with a fresh google account.

OSBotify · 2025-12-12T19:00:15Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/marcaaron in version: 9.2.77-0 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2025-12-12T22:05:29Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/yuwenmemon in version: 9.2.77-1 🚀

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

marcaaron · 2025-12-22T23:59:18Z

Just following up to report that this works great on iOS, but still unconfirmed on Android. I asked QA to help here. AFAICT from the logs when testing on my Android phone there is a review available - but the modal does not show. I also pulled device logs and there's no information really other than it looks like it should be working. Did some digging and found out that Android can fail silently if Google's algorithm determines that the user should not be able to review. Going to try with a different account to see if that works better.

m-natarajan · 2025-12-24T14:36:32Z

App review not displayed in Samsung A52 / Android 14, v9.2.83-0 Prod

app.review.mp4

marcaaron · 2025-12-24T21:54:11Z

Moving this conversation to Slack as I'd prefer to ship the Auth changes only after confirming that the in-app review modal works as expected on Android.

jayeshmangwani · 2026-03-05T06:28:54Z

Coming from this issue #79635 , we should have used localized strings in src/components/ProactiveAppReviewModal.tsx.

marcaaron added 3 commits November 11, 2025 11:48

Add initial files

e932142

Add manager to hide/show modal

adf5632

Clean up and handle errors correctly

6effc4e

marcaaron self-assigned this Nov 11, 2025

marcaaron added 7 commits November 11, 2025 13:51

Merge branch 'main' into marcaaron-proactiveReview

8add379

Improve design

7d7ba48

Add expo-store-review

08c5202

Add missing files

c444435

Add expo-store-review

c51b5b2

Fix logic for skip after 30 days behavior

e62e3ba

Fix types. Not too sure how to test this one.

46342a0

marcaaron added 2 commits November 11, 2025 16:09

Add store review url

0ef6449

add test trigger type

995a985

marcaaron changed the title ~~[WIP] Proactive app review~~ [HOLD Auth & Web-E] Add Proactive Review Modal Nov 12, 2025

marcaaron added 14 commits November 11, 2025 17:34

Prettier

0bfad43

Make store review native only. Remove fallback URL junk

c18d3a5

add another log. android cant be tested on dev

29c9659

Fix conflicts

503f410

Conflicts

33fc7e9

Fix conflicts

4753b88

Weird package.json conflicts

e8c7177

update package-lock.json

8239216

podfile

aca065a

Merge branch 'main' into marcaaron-proactiveReview

dcc47fd

update nvp to appReview

6f81d85

add type

d1bdc0b

Fix named imports and lazy loaded illustrations

b075485

Fix lint issues

cdf4403

marcaaron added the InternalQA This pull request required internal QA label Nov 24, 2025

FitseTLT approved these changes Dec 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from deetergp December 9, 2025 19:01

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2025

[Due Dec 16th] Payment issue for E/App PR#74880 #77170

Closed

deetergp approved these changes Dec 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

marcaaron merged commit 53c42f2 into main Dec 9, 2025
44 of 45 checks passed

marcaaron deleted the marcaaron-proactiveReview branch December 9, 2025 23:09

melvin-bot bot added the Emergency label Dec 9, 2025

marcaaron removed the Emergency label Dec 9, 2025

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2025

[$125] [Due for payment 2025-12-19] Investigate workflow job failing on main: prettier / Prettier check #77189

Closed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Dec 10, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-12-10 #77285

Closed

94 tasks

jayeshmangwani mentioned this pull request Jan 23, 2026

[Awaiting checklist] [Due for payment 2026-03-04] [$250] "Enjoying Expensify" popup for new user is not translated, displays in English #79635

Closed

7 tasks

Conversation

marcaaron commented Nov 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Nov 12, 2025 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

FitseTLT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

deetergp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

deetergp commented Dec 9, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Dec 9, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Dec 10, 2025

Uh oh!

Julesssss commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 11, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Dec 12, 2025

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 22, 2025

Uh oh!

m-natarajan commented Dec 24, 2025

Uh oh!

marcaaron commented Dec 24, 2025

Uh oh!

jayeshmangwani commented Mar 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

marcaaron commented Nov 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Nov 12, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

deetergp commented Dec 9, 2025 •

edited

Loading

marcaaron commented Dec 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading