Refactor Netsuite import custom segments/record to use useSubPage by bernhardoj · Pull Request #80996 · Expensify/App

bernhardoj · 2026-01-30T11:07:36Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #79046
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Same as QA Steps

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

Prerequisite: accounting feature is enabled and Netsuite is connected on the workspace

Go to the workspace > Accounting > Import > Custom segments/records > Add custom segment/record
Play around the navigation by going next and back using the app, browser, or device back gesture/button
Verify the navigation works correctly
On the confirmation page, press any of the fields to edit it
Then, press Confirm to save the edit
Verify it goes back to the confirm page
Press Confirm to add it
Verify it goes back to the Custom segment/record page

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

android.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android.mweb.mp4

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

melvin-bot · 2026-01-30T11:07:43Z

@dukenv0307 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]

bernhardoj · 2026-01-30T11:08:05Z

We need either this PR or #80995 to be merged first, so we can remove CustomFieldSubStepWithPolicy type.

github-actions · 2026-01-30T11:10:48Z

src/pages/workspace/accounting/netsuite/types.ts

 import type {MenuItemProps} from '@components/MenuItem';
 import type {OfflineWithFeedbackProps} from '@components/OfflineWithFeedback';
 import type {SelectorType} from '@components/SelectionScreen';
+import {SubPageProps} from '@hooks/useSubPage/types';


❌ CONSISTENCY-2 (docs)

The import statement is inconsistent with the rest of the file. All other type imports use import type syntax for type-only imports, but this one uses a regular import.

Suggested fix:

import type {SubPageProps} from '@hooks/useSubPage/types';

This follows TypeScript best practices and maintains consistency with the existing import patterns in the file.

Please rate this suggestion with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve! Reactions are used to monitor reviewer efficiency.

github-actions · 2026-01-30T11:13:22Z

Code Review Complete

I've completed a comprehensive review of PR #80996 which refactors the NetSuite import custom segments/record flow from useSubStep to useSubPage.

Review Summary

Changes Reviewed:

✅ CONST structure updated with new page name constants
✅ Routes updated to support sub-page navigation pattern
✅ Main content component refactored from useSubStep to useSubPage
✅ All substep components updated to use new type definitions
✅ Type definitions properly extended with CustomFieldSubPageWithPolicy

Key Observations:

The refactoring follows a consistent pattern across all substep files
Navigation logic properly handles back/next navigation and editing mode
Route building includes proper undefined handling and logging
TypeScript types are correctly defined and applied

The refactoring appears technically sound and consistent with the codebase patterns. The changes improve the navigation structure by using URL-based sub-pages instead of index-based substeps.

codecov · 2026-01-30T11:20:24Z

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/CONST/index.ts	`95.20% <ø> (ø)`
src/hooks/useNetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentForm.ts	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...tomFieldNew/NetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentPage.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...tCustomFieldNew/subPages/ChooseSegmentTypeStep.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...stomFieldNew/subPages/ConfirmCustomSegmentList.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...mFieldNew/subPages/CustomSegmentInternalIdStep.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...stomFieldNew/subPages/CustomSegmentMappingStep.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...tCustomFieldNew/subPages/CustomSegmentNameStep.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
...tomFieldNew/subPages/CustomSegmentScriptIdStep.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/ROUTES.ts	`15.89% <0.00%> (-0.08%)`	⬇️
... and 1 more
... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

joekaufmanexpensify · 2026-02-02T19:05:29Z

No product considerations, removing my review

dukenv0307 · 2026-02-03T02:11:27Z

...nting/netsuite/import/NetSuiteImportCustomFieldNew/NetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentContent.tsx

+        pages,
+        startFrom,
+        onFinished: handleFinishStep,
+        buildRoute: (pageName, action) => ROUTES.POLICY_ACCOUNTING_NETSUITE_IMPORT_CUSTOM_SEGMENT_ADD.getRoute(route.params.policyID, pageName, action),


can we use policyID from policy.id? then we don't need to pass route to NetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentContent

policy.id can be undefined when the onyx is loading

…segments-n-records

dukenv0307 · 2026-02-04T08:41:29Z

...counting/netsuite/import/NetSuiteImportCustomFieldNew/NetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentPage.tsx

    return (
        <NetSuiteImportAddCustomSegmentContent
            policy={policy}
+            route={route}


Can we pass the policyID only?

dukenv0307 · 2026-02-04T08:58:10Z

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.2026-02-04.at.16.03.15.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-02-04.at.15.47.34.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-02-04.at.15.57.13.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-04.at.15.48.10.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-02-04.at.15.45.24.mov

bernhardoj · 2026-02-04T15:44:29Z

Let's merge #80995 first, so we can remove CustomFieldSubStepWithPolicy type.

…segments-n-records

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-02T01:33:34Z

Is it still on hold?

bernhardoj · 2026-03-02T02:12:05Z

Yes, we still on hold for #80995

…segments-n-records

bernhardoj · 2026-03-08T14:37:25Z

@dukenv0307 removed the hold

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-09T02:19:26Z

@bernhardoj We got some lint errors

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-09T02:43:58Z

Go to the workspace > Accounting > Import > Custom segments/records > Add custom segment/record
Fill the information until reach the confirmation step
Click outside to close the RHP
Do the step 1 again
Click back button
Observe that the navigation transition is incorrect

Screen.Recording.2026-03-09.at.09.34.23.mov

bernhardoj · 2026-03-09T03:24:17Z

We got some lint errors

Looks like a github issue showing the old lint error.

bernhardoj · 2026-03-09T04:22:38Z

src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/index.tsx

        animationTypeForReplace: 'push',
    },
+    [SCREENS.WORKSPACE.ACCOUNTING.NETSUITE_IMPORT_CUSTOM_SEGMENT_ADD]: {
+        animationTypeForReplace: 'push',


Observe that the navigation transition is incorrect

I know why this happened now. This is because we changed the animation type from replace to push. We did this for missing personal details and import custom list too.

When we go back to a screen that doesn't exist on the stack, we use replace, and by default, we set the animation to pop.

App/src/libs/Navigation/AppNavigator/ModalStackNavigators/useModalStackScreenOptions.ts

Line 45 in e32727c

animationTypeForReplace: 'pop',

But to solve the wrong animation after the isRedirecting transition of useSubPage, we change the animation to push.

I think we should rethink of a solution to this navigation animation for useSubPage.

cc: @MrMuzyk @arosiclair

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-11T05:22:51Z

What is the next step here?

bernhardoj · 2026-03-11T05:37:39Z

I think we can skip the navigation transition issue for now, but we still need to solve #84475 first

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-13T03:09:26Z

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.2026-03-13.at.10.02.37.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-03-13.at.09.56.35.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-03-13.at.10.08.21.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-13.at.09.52.01.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-13.at.09.44.46.mov

arosiclair · 2026-03-13T14:34:38Z

Go to the workspace > Accounting > Import > Custom segments/records > Add custom segment/record

Fill the information until reach the confirmation step

Click outside to close the RHP

Do the step 1 again

Click back button

Observe that the navigation transition is incorrect

Is this still broken?

bernhardoj · 2026-03-13T16:38:03Z

animationTypeForReplace: 'push',

@arosiclair Yes, since we set the animation to "push"

arosiclair · 2026-03-16T16:51:53Z

I reproduced the issue in other flows as well so let's fix it in #85431

…segments-n-records

bernhardoj · 2026-03-23T05:30:53Z

The nav animation PR is merged. I think we can continue this one

arosiclair · 2026-03-23T13:42:30Z

@bernhardoj just have to fix types

dukenv0307 · 2026-03-25T03:13:28Z

@bernhardoj kindly bump

…segments-n-records

bernhardoj · 2026-03-25T04:51:42Z

Oh, missed this one. Thanks for the bump. Fixed.

refactor to use useSubPage

7af2685

bernhardoj requested review from a team as code owners January 30, 2026 11:07

melvin-bot bot assigned bernhardoj Jan 30, 2026

melvin-bot bot requested review from dukenv0307 and joekaufmanexpensify January 30, 2026 11:07

melvin-bot bot removed request for a team January 30, 2026 11:07

github-actions bot reviewed Jan 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

lint

2e5309d

joekaufmanexpensify removed their request for review February 2, 2026 19:05

dukenv0307 reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

bernhardoj added 3 commits February 3, 2026 18:05

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

87df461

…segments-n-records

show loading indicator when redirecting

e0fe5ce

update route type

58c1493

dukenv0307 reviewed Feb 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

only pass the policyID

7a560a0

bernhardoj added 4 commits February 25, 2026 19:54

fix loading has transparent bg

53fbe26

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

c494382

…segments-n-records

change the animation type

17662a1

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

a3c2629

…segments-n-records

bernhardoj mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2026

Refactor Netsuite import custom list to use useSubPage #80995

Merged

53 tasks

lint

7c1f492

update type

fac7be2

bernhardoj changed the title ~~Refactor Netsuite import custom segments/record to use useSubPage~~ [HOLD #80995] Refactor Netsuite import custom segments/record to use useSubPage Mar 2, 2026

bernhardoj added 3 commits March 8, 2026 22:30

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

66094a9

…segments-n-records

remove unused types

36d3ed7

fix missng const after resolving conflict

0d40acd

bernhardoj changed the title ~~[HOLD #80995] Refactor Netsuite import custom segments/record to use useSubPage~~ Refactor Netsuite import custom segments/record to use useSubPage Mar 8, 2026

bernhardoj commented Mar 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

dukenv0307 approved these changes Mar 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from arosiclair March 13, 2026 03:09

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

8f526f7

…segments-n-records

arosiclair previously approved these changes Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

bernhardoj added 2 commits March 25, 2026 12:49

Merge branch 'main' into chore/79046-refactor-netsuite-import-custom-…

4b174f1

…segments-n-records

add required reasonAttributes

d1d127e

bernhardoj dismissed arosiclair’s stale review via d1d127e March 25, 2026 04:51

Conversation

bernhardoj commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited by arosiclair 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!

melvin-bot bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Jan 30, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot Jan 30, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

❌ CONSISTENCY-2 (docs)

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Jan 30, 2026

Code Review Complete

Review Summary

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bernhardoj Feb 3, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bernhardoj Feb 4, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Feb 4, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 2, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 8, 2026

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 9, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj Mar 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 11, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 11, 2026

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Mar 13, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

arosiclair commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

arosiclair commented Mar 16, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Mar 23, 2026

Uh oh!

bernhardoj commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited by arosiclair

Loading

codecov bot commented Jan 30, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Feb 4, 2026 •

edited

Loading

bernhardoj Mar 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading