Skip to content

[Part 2] Remove Onyx.connect() for the key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.NEXT_STEP in src/libs/actions/IOU.ts#78925

Merged
danieldoglas merged 2 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
parasharrajat:onyx/66514-2
Jan 7, 2026
Merged

[Part 2] Remove Onyx.connect() for the key: ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.NEXT_STEP in src/libs/actions/IOU.ts#78925
danieldoglas merged 2 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
parasharrajat:onyx/66514-2

Conversation

@parasharrajat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #66514
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Note: We are doing a generic refactor in this PR so generally the behaviour of mentioned actioned should be same as before this PR.

  1. Log in with an account with a workspace.
  2. Create an expense in that workspace.
  3. Submit the report.
  4. Verify that the next step is updated and the report is submitted.
  5. Approve the report.
  6. Verify that the next step is updated and the report is approved.
  7. Mark the report paid.
  8. Verify that the next step is updated and the report is marked paid.
  9. Click more, cancel the payment.
  10. Unapprove the report.
  11. Retract the report.
  12. Verify that you can take these actions, and they behave normally, and there is no change from past behaviour.
  • 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 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.
  • 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

@parasharrajat parasharrajat marked this pull request as ready for review January 6, 2026 18:34
@parasharrajat parasharrajat requested review from a team as code owners January 6, 2026 18:34
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from ikevin127 January 6, 2026 18:35
@melvin-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 6, 2026

@ikevin127 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 melvin-bot bot requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team January 6, 2026 18:35
@codecov
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codecov bot commented Jan 6, 2026

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/components/ProcessMoneyReportHoldMenu.tsx 0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ReportPreview/MoneyRequestReportPreviewContent.tsx 59.68% <ø> (-0.87%) ⬇️
src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts 67.26% <100.00%> (-0.23%) ⬇️
src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 20 files with indirect coverage changes

@ikevin127
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ikevin127 commented Jan 6, 2026

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 tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • 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 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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.js 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 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.
  • 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.
  • 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

Screen.Recording.2026-01-06.at.15.18.25.mov

@ikevin127
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@parasharrajat 🟢 Only found 2 non-blocking issues related to naming / docs - to be addressed optionally (if see fit):

1. Inconsistent Naming Convention (Code Quality) - Optional

Files: Multiple

The naming varies between:

  • iouReportCurrentNextStepDeprecated (in getPayMoneyRequestParams)
  • invoiceReportCurrentNextStepDeprecated (in PayInvoiceArgs)
  • nextStep (in components)
  • moneyRequestReportNextStep (in ProcessMoneyReportHoldMenu)
  • iouReportNextStep (in MoneyRequestReportPreviewContent)

Recommendation: Use consistent naming across all files. Suggested pattern:

  • Components: reportNextStep or nextStep
  • Actions: currentNextStep or reportCurrentNextStep

2. Missing JSDoc Update (Documentation) - Optional
File: src/libs/actions/IOU/index.ts

The function payMoneyRequest and getPayMoneyRequestParams should have updated JSDoc comments explaining the new parameter:

/**
 * @param iouReportCurrentNextStepDeprecated - The current next step for the IOU report, 
 *        passed to avoid direct Onyx reads in action functions
 */

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ikevin127 ikevin127 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Only two non-blocking mentions ☝️ related to naming / jsdoc - otherwise LGTM 🟢

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from danieldoglas January 6, 2026 23:46
@parasharrajat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

parasharrajat commented Jan 7, 2026

Inconsistent Naming Convention (Code Quality) - Optional

That was an intentional change, as these next steps are linked to a specific report, which is also passed as a parameter. To emphasize whose report's next step needs to be passed here, I appended the param's name to the next step param. This makes it easy for devs to know what next step needs to be passed here just by looking at the param name.

  1. Missing JSDoc Update (Documentation) - Optional

There is no existing JSDoc comment there. Looks like your AI needs an instruction 😄

@danieldoglas danieldoglas merged commit f903a08 into Expensify:main Jan 7, 2026
31 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 7, 2026

✋ 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
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 8, 2026

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

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

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jan 9, 2026

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

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

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants