Bring approval overLimitForwardsTo configuration V2 by abzokhattab · Pull Request #78350 · Expensify/App

abzokhattab · 2025-12-23T09:50:31Z

Explanation of Change

Bringing back the changes introduced in this PR and fixing the regression issues

Fixed Issues

$ #75775
#78316
#78320
#78324
#78327
#78342
#78343
PROPOSAL:

Test 1: Setting Approval Limit on an Approver (Create Flow)

Precondition: Workspace with "Add approvals" enabled

Go to Workspace > Workflows
Click to create a new approval workflow
Add members to "Expenses from"
Select an approver
Verify the approval limit page shows with Skip and Next buttons
Click Skip
Verify you return to the workflow editor without a limit set
Click on the approver again
Enter a report amount (e.g., $500)
Leave the additional approver empty
Click Next
Verify you return to the workflow editor without a limit config set
Clear the report amount
Select an additional approver from the list
Click Next
Verify error "Please enter a valid amount" is shown
Enter a report amount (e.g., $500)
Click Next
Verify the workflow shows the limit description (e.g., "Reports above $500 forward to [Name]")
Save the workflow
Verify workflow is created successfully

Test 2: Editing Approval Limit on an Approver (Edit Flow)

Precondition: Workspace with "Add approvals" enabled, with an existing approval workflow that has an approval limit set

Go to Workspace > Workflows
Click on an existing approval workflow with an approval limit
Click on the approver with the limit
Verify the amount field shows the existing limit
Verify the additional approver is pre-selected
Clear the report amount
Click Save
Verify error "Please enter a valid amount" is shown
Enter a new report amount (e.g., $1000)
Select a different additional approver
Click Save
Verify the new limit description shows correctly
Click on the same approver again
Click Remove limit
Verify you return to the workflow editor
Verify the limit description is no longer shown
Save the workflow
Verify workflow updates successfully without the approval limit

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

Same as tests

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.42.23.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.45.32.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.32.31.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.35.28.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.40.17.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.40.54.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.21.04.mov

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.23.22.27.mov

codecov · 2025-12-23T09:58:50Z

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/SCREENS.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/components/ApproverSelectionList.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...rc/components/Icon/chunks/expensify-icons.chunk.ts	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...gation/linkingConfig/RELATIONS/WORKSPACE_TO_RHP.ts	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	`75.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/pages/workspace/withPolicy.tsx	`100.00% <ø> (ø)`
...ges/workspace/workflows/WorkspaceWorkflowsPage.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...pprovals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsCreatePage.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/styles/index.ts	`46.55% <ø> (ø)`
src/components/AmountForm.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 14 more
... and 47 files with indirect coverage changes

abzokhattab · 2025-12-23T10:25:54Z

There is also a bug in the Expenses From step where if the user deletes a member offline and creates a new workflow the user will still show up in the Expenses From` step..

fixed it

aimane-chnaif · 2025-12-23T11:24:43Z

I think it's better to revert original PR and fix all regressions in v2.
There are core blockers: #76032 (comment)

abzokhattab · 2025-12-23T11:41:54Z

Not a bad idea ,,, i think most of them are small issues but i agree for the amount its imporant to maintain the behaviour for VND currency and negative amount ... this was overlooked.

lets revert and i will prepare another PR

what do u think @JS00001

aimane-chnaif · 2025-12-23T11:44:36Z

Here's revert

This reverts commit e8f1f87.

melvin-bot · 2025-12-25T14:27:05Z

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running:

npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

…it-followup

abzokhattab · 2025-12-29T15:03:23Z

I've fixed all the issues except for the following 4, where I need clarification on the expected behavior @JS00001 @aimane-chnaif @JmillsExpensify @dubielzyk-expensify

1. #78316: What is the expected behavior here? In my opinion, pressing back on the confirm page should dismiss the modal since it's the first page the user sees when opening the approval workflow. If they navigate back to this page at any point and press back again, dismissing the modal seems like the logical behavior. However, this feels a bit confusing to me — what do you think?

2. #78342: We didn't discuss the expected behavior for this scenario. When a member who is configured as an additional approver in a workflow is removed from the workspace, should we reset the limit configuration (i.e., clear both the additional approver and the limit)? I assume yes, but if we go this route, we'll need backend changes as well. Currently, when the app goes online, the configuration is restored from the API and isn't removed:

Screen.Recording.2025-12-29.at.15.49.12.mov

3. #78328: Is this a valid bug? In this case, there's another text element that has replaced the description. What should the page display here — should we show both texts? If so, how should they be laid out?

4. #78341: this was not in the requriement, just confirming should we tackle it now or keep it for a followup improvement?

…it-followup

dubielzyk-expensify · 2025-12-30T10:02:09Z

[Due for payment 2026-01-05] Approval-RHP back button returns to approval limit page when it is skipped, repeated navigation #78316: What is the expected behavior here? In my opinion, pressing back on the confirm page should dismiss the modal since it's the first page the user sees when opening the approval workflow. If they navigate back to this page at any point and press back again, dismissing the modal seems like the logical behavior. However, this feels a bit confusing to me — what do you think?

I agree with your opinion here that it should close the modal since it's the first page. When seeing the video it felt very loopy and I wasn't expecting the behavior so I'd say close the modal there.

Workflows - Removed member is still shown in description and additional approver field #78342: We didn't discuss the expected behavior for this scenario. When a member who is configured as an additional approver in a workflow is removed from the workspace, should we reset the limit configuration (i.e., clear both the additional approver and the limit)? I assume yes, but if we go this route, we'll need backend changes as well. Currently, when the app goes online, the configuration is restored from the API and isn't removed:

I'll let @trjExpensify or @JmillsExpensify chime in here since I only have a vague memory about what we do. It make sense to me to clear the approver and the limit when they're removed from the workspace.

Workflows - Limit description does not appear when approver belongs to another workflow #78328: Is this a valid bug? In this case, there's another text element that has replaced the description. What should the page display here — should we show both texts? If so, how should they be laid out?

Hmm. Yeah we technically need two descriptions here right? Can we just add them together? It might look a bit long but it should be 3 sentences instead of 2.

Workflows - No system message for changing approval limit and additional approver #78341: this was not in the requriement, just confirming should we tackle it now or keep it for a followup improvement?

Also a question from @JmillsExpensify

…it-followup

abzokhattab · 2026-01-04T15:50:57Z

Fixed ✅
waiting for product team input
yes in this case there are two descriptions ... if we want to combine them how should it look like?
waiting for product team input

cc @dubielzyk-expensify @trjExpensify @JmillsExpensify

dubielzyk-expensify · 2026-01-04T23:50:29Z

Let's wait for @JmillsExpensify and @trjExpensify 's feedback when they're back from OOO. Hopefully should get some answers this week

JmillsExpensify · 2026-01-05T21:16:14Z

For #78328, I don't think that's a valid bug, as it's fine if someone is in the fallback/default workflow and then also in more specific workflows.

JmillsExpensify · 2026-01-05T21:18:26Z

Workflows - Removed member is still shown in description and additional approver field #78342: We didn't discuss the expected behavior for this scenario. When a member who is configured as an additional approver in a workflow is removed from the workspace, should we reset the limit configuration (i.e., clear both the additional approver and the limit)? I assume yes, but if we go this route, we'll need backend changes as well. Currently, when the app goes online, the configuration is restored from the API and isn't removed:

I'll let @trjExpensify or @JmillsExpensify chime in here since I only have a vague memory about what we do. It make sense to me to clear the approver and the limit when they're removed from the workspace.

Agree, let's clear the approver and limit when they're removed from the workspace.

Workflows - No system message for changing approval limit and additional approver #78341: this was not in the requriement, just confirming should we tackle it now or keep it for a followup improvement?

Also a question from @JmillsExpensify

This feels like a follow-up.

…it-followup

JS00001 · 2026-01-06T16:07:45Z

Commented in slack for BE issues: https://expensify.slack.com/archives/C09V8KG184B/p1767715386486329

aimane-chnaif · 2026-01-07T09:05:51Z

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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Regression tests:

78327.mov

78342.mov

78343.mov

#78320

#78324

#78328

78328.mov

78316.mov

aimane-chnaif · 2026-01-07T12:29:04Z

#78328 can be removed from fixed issues as not valid bug.

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

abzokhattab · 2026-01-07T12:55:08Z

@dubielzyk-expensify fyi for this #78328 in case it happens it will display the two descriptions as follows:

JS00001 · 2026-01-07T15:50:31Z

@aimane-chnaif @abzokhattab is this one ready for final review?

aimane-chnaif · 2026-01-07T15:51:56Z

yes, approved from my side

JS00001 · 2026-01-07T15:52:04Z

Nice, reviewing

JS00001 · 2026-01-07T15:59:03Z

Second times the charm!

OSBotify · 2026-01-07T16:08:24Z

✋ 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 · 2026-01-08T16:48:52Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/JS00001 in version: 9.2.96-1 🚀

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

lanitochka17 · 2026-01-08T20:51:51Z

This PR is failing because of issue ##79151

The issue is reproducible in: Web Android

Bug7043985_1767904845437.bandicam_2026-01-08_23-26-14-466.1.mp4

…limit-followup" This reverts commit 984c986, reversing changes made to f903a08.

OSBotify · 2026-01-09T18:17:51Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.2.96-6 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-01-09T19:14:13Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.2.96-6 🚀

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

OSBotify · 2026-01-09T19:21:09Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/arosiclair in version: 9.2.96-6 🚀

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

melvin-bot bot assigned abzokhattab Dec 23, 2025

abzokhattab added 3 commits December 25, 2025 15:25

workflow approval limit followup

7d1c0e2

filter out removed members from "expenses from" selection list

4bff09f

Reapply "Bring overLimitForwardsTo configuration into New Expensify"

7142c13

This reverts commit e8f1f87.

abzokhattab force-pushed the workflow-approval-limit-followup branch from 9c7832f to 7142c13 Compare December 25, 2025 14:27

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into workflow-approval-lim…

9da18e9

…it-followup

abzokhattab changed the title ~~workflow approval limit followup~~ Bring approval overLimitForwardsTo configuration into New Expensify Dec 29, 2025

abzokhattab changed the title ~~Bring approval overLimitForwardsTo configuration into New Expensify~~ Bring approval overLimitForwardsTo configuration V2 Dec 29, 2025

abzokhattab added 2 commits December 29, 2025 16:13

fix reset amount on unselecting the approval

d5d026a

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into workflow-approval-lim…

0c10055

…it-followup

abzokhattab added 3 commits January 4, 2026 16:45

Merge into main

d8b6313

dimiss modal on clicking back insde the confirm

22db274

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into workflow-approval-lim…

a81fba9

…it-followup

minor edit

db3814b

abzokhattab added 3 commits January 6, 2026 15:15

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into workflow-approval-lim…

863f071

…it-followup

fixing eslint

60b187f

Use lazy icon loading in ApprovalWorkflowEditor

f2ed06d

JS00001 removed the request for review from inimaga January 7, 2026 12:29

aimane-chnaif reviewed Jan 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

src/pages/workspace/workflows/approvals/WorkspaceWorkflowsApprovalsApprovalLimitPage.tsx Show resolved Hide resolved

aimane-chnaif approved these changes Jan 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

JS00001 approved these changes Jan 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

JS00001 merged commit 984c986 into Expensify:main Jan 7, 2026
38 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-01-08 #79110

Closed

76 tasks

This was referenced Jan 8, 2026

Workflows - RHP back button on confirm page closes workflow setup #79131

Closed

Workflows - Error shows up when saving workflow when the report limit is not saved #79133

Closed

jponikarchuk mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Workflows - "Reports above x forward to y" persists when approver is removed from workspace #79142

Closed

7 tasks

lanitochka17 mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

[$250] Workflow - The removed second approver reappears after navigating back to edit approval page #79151

Closed

7 tasks

lanitochka17 mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Workflow - Clicking Next with a limit set but no approver does not return to workflow editor #79154

Closed

7 tasks

mitarachim mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Confirm page reopens when swiping right twice from Confirm page after changing Approver #79167

Closed

7 tasks

arosiclair added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Revert "Merge pull request #78350 from abzokhattab/workflow-approval-…

53416ab

…limit-followup" This reverts commit 984c986, reversing changes made to f903a08.

arosiclair mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2026

Revert "Merge pull request #78350 from abzokhattab/workflow-approval-… #79169

Closed

melvin-bot bot mentioned this pull request Jan 9, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-01-16] [$1750] R1 Bring overLimitForwardsTo configuration into New Expensify #75775

Closed

jponikarchuk mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2026

[$250] Workspace - RBR displays after select secondary login account as Additional approver #79637

Open

7 tasks

ZhenjaHorbach mentioned this pull request Feb 2, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-01-30] [$250] Workflow - The removed second approver reappears after navigating back to edit approval page #79976

Closed

7 tasks

Conversation

abzokhattab commented Dec 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 23, 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!

abzokhattab commented Dec 23, 2025

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Dec 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abzokhattab commented Dec 23, 2025

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Dec 23, 2025

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Dec 25, 2025

Uh oh!

abzokhattab commented Dec 29, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dubielzyk-expensify commented Dec 30, 2025

Uh oh!

abzokhattab commented Jan 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

dubielzyk-expensify commented Jan 4, 2026

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

JmillsExpensify commented Jan 5, 2026

Uh oh!

JS00001 commented Jan 6, 2026

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Jan 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

abzokhattab commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

JS00001 commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

aimane-chnaif commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

JS00001 commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

JS00001 commented Jan 7, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 7, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

lanitochka17 commented Jan 8, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

abzokhattab commented Dec 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 23, 2025 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

aimane-chnaif commented Dec 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading

abzokhattab commented Dec 29, 2025 •

edited

Loading

abzokhattab commented Jan 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

aimane-chnaif commented Jan 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading

JS00001 commented Jan 7, 2026 •

edited

Loading