Skip to content

Make reason field required when closing account#85701

Merged
blimpich merged 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2
Mar 19, 2026
Merged

Make reason field required when closing account#85701
blimpich merged 1 commit intomainfrom
claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2

Conversation

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor

@MelvinBot MelvinBot commented Mar 18, 2026

Explanation of Change

The validate function in CloseAccountPage.tsx only listed phoneOrEmail as a required field when calling getFieldRequiredErrors. The reasonForLeaving field was not included, so users could close their account without providing a reason and no validation error was shown.

This adds reasonForLeaving to the required fields array so that getFieldRequiredErrors will now also check it, displaying the standard "This field is required" error when the reason field is left empty.

This is a recreated version of #85682 with a clean branch (the previous PR had an orphan branch causing unrelated files to appear in the diff).

Fixed Issues

$ #85632
PROPOSAL: #85632 (comment)

Tests

  1. Navigate to Account > Security
  2. Click "Close account"
  3. Leave the "We'd hate to see you go!" reason field empty
  4. Fill in the email/phone confirmation field correctly
  5. Click "Close account"
  6. Verify a "This field is required" error appears on the reason field and the form does not submit
  7. Enter a reason in the field
  8. Verify the form now submits successfully (shows confirmation modal)
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

  1. Go offline
  2. Navigate to Account > Security > Close account
  3. Focus on the reason field, then leave it empty and focus on the email/phone confirmation field
  4. Verify a "This field is required" validation error appears on the reason field (the "Close account" button is disabled offline, but client-side field validation still triggers on blur)

QA Steps

  1. Navigate to Account > Security
  2. Click "Close account"
  3. Leave the "We'd hate to see you go!" reason field empty
  4. Fill in the email/phone field correctly
  5. Click "Close account"
  6. Verify a validation error appears on the reason field blocking submission
  7. Enter a reason, verify the form proceeds normally
  • 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
  • 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 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

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Co-authored-by: Krishna <Krishna2323@users.noreply.github.com>
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team March 18, 2026 19:46
@MelvinBot MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review March 18, 2026 19:47
@MelvinBot MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner March 18, 2026 19:47
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from Krishna2323 and removed request for a team March 18, 2026 19:47
@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 18, 2026

@Krishna2323 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 trjExpensify and removed request for a team March 18, 2026 19:47
@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

I created this PR from an upstream branch since I don't have push access to your fork.

To take ownership of this branch and push updates, run:

git remote add upstream https://github.com/Expensify/App.git
git fetch upstream claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2
git checkout -b claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2 upstream/claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2
git push -u origin claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2

Then you can close this PR and open a new one from your fork.

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor

Krishna2323 commented Mar 19, 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 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_native.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
android_chrome.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
ios_native.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
ios_safari.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
web_chrome.mp4

Copy link
Contributor

@Krishna2323 Krishna2323 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! :shipit:

@melvin-bot
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Mar 19, 2026

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #85632 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested a review from blimpich March 19, 2026 21:21
@blimpich blimpich merged commit e46dc54 into main Mar 19, 2026
44 checks passed
@blimpich blimpich deleted the claude-requireReasonForLeaving-v2 branch March 19, 2026 23:11
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

🚧 @blimpich has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ 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
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.3.42-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@IuliiaHerets
Copy link

IuliiaHerets commented Mar 23, 2026

QA team failed this PR on Native apps with an original issue, no validation error is shown in offline mode

cc @blimpich @trjExpensify @Krishna2323

1774268452670.andoid.mp4

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor

@IuliiaHerets sorry for the confusion but the offline steps in the OP is incorrect. In offline mode the error will be only shown if we focus on the input, leave it empty and then focus on the other input.

Offline tests

  1. Go offline
  2. Navigate to Account > Security > Close account
  3. Leave the reason field empty and attempt to submit
  4. Verify the validation error still appears (this is client-side validation, works offline)

@MelvinBot please update these steps, the "Close account" button is disabled in offline mode so the validation won't happen.

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor Author

Updated the offline test steps in the PR description. The new steps now reflect that the "Close account" button is disabled offline, and instead test the client-side field validation by focusing on the reason field, leaving it empty, and then focusing on the email/phone field to trigger the blur validation error.

@IuliiaHerets
Copy link

IuliiaHerets commented Mar 23, 2026

@Krishna2323 @MelvinBot PR is still fail, no "This field is required" validation error in the Native app in offline mode

image
andoid.mp4

@Krishna2323
Copy link
Contributor

Focus on the reason field, then leave it empty and focus on the email/phone confirmation field

@IuliiaHerets you missed this step.

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.

5 participants