Skip to content

Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page#76998

Merged
stitesExpensify merged 49 commits into
mainfrom
lucien/use-canReject-from-search
Dec 11, 2025
Merged

Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page#76998
stitesExpensify merged 49 commits into
mainfrom
lucien/use-canReject-from-search

Conversation

@lakchote

@lakchote lakchote commented Dec 8, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Context

Use the canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in the Reports page

Screen.Recording.2025-12-10.at.10.02.24.mov

Fixed Issues

$ #76997
PROPOSAL:

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Prerequisites:

Test 1: Standard Bulk Reject scenario

  • Having a workspace, a workspace owner, a submitter
  • Delayed submissions and approvals enabled.
  1. Create and submit three expenses as a submitter
  2. Go to the Reports page > Expenses as the workspace owner, bulk select the three expenses
  3. Select Reject
  4. Provide the rejection reason
  5. Verify it succeeds, and that the rejection message is propagated to the three transaction threads
  6. Open any expense which was rejected in step 3.
  7. Verify that the reject system message & reject comment display properly without any duplicate

Test 2: Performance - Select All with many items (regression test)

  1. Log in with an account that has 50+ transactions in search results
  2. Go to Reports > Expenses > All
  3. Click "Select All"
    Expected:
    • App should NOT crash
    • App should NOT get stuck on splash screen on next launch
    • Selection should complete smoothly without lag

Test 3: Reject option should be hidden for IOUs

  1. Submit an IOU
  2. As the recipient of the IOU, go to Search > Expenses > Outstanding
    Expected: The reject option should be hidden

Test 4: Reject option should be hidden for Reports

  1. Go to Reports > Approve
    Expected: The reject option should be hidden
  2. Go to Reports > Approve
    Expected: The reject option should be hidden

Test 5: Reject option availability in a report's details view (see video test below)

  1. Go to Reports > Approve
  2. Click on a report to access its details
    Expected: You should see the reject option when selecting one or more expenses, and it should work
image
  1. Go to Inbox > Select a report
    Expected: You should see the reject option when selecting one or more expenses and it should work
image
Screen.Recording.2025-12-10.at.14.31.25.mov

Test 6: Test that RHP closes correctly

Precondition:

  1. Submission frequency is set to Instantly.
  2. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
  3. Go to workspace chat.
  4. Create two expenses.
  5. Go to Reports > Reports (optional).
  6. Open the report.
  7. Select two expenses via checkbox.
  8. Click More > Reject.
  9. Enter reason and click Reject expenses.

Expected: RHP closes correctly without any error or "Not here" page

Offline tests

NA, it's for the Reports page, we can't do that offline.

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Same as tests

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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 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 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
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed 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 approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • 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.js 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 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
      • 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(themeColors.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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

@lakchote lakchote self-assigned this Dec 8, 2025
@lakchote lakchote changed the title Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page [HOLD Auth#18611] Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page Dec 8, 2025
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Dec 8, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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 85.84% <ø> (ø)
src/components/MoneyRequestHeader.tsx 0.75% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts 75.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts 71.38% <100.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
src/ROUTES.ts 13.27% <0.00%> (+0.09%) ⬆️
src/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.ts 81.65% <57.14%> (-3.64%) ⬇️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts 21.35% <0.00%> (-0.43%) ⬇️
src/pages/Search/SearchRejectReasonPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/components/Search/index.tsx 32.37% <0.00%> (-0.40%) ⬇️
src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx 0.15% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
... and 1 more
... and 35 files with indirect coverage changes

@lakchote
lakchote force-pushed the lucien/use-canReject-from-search branch from 2711d1d to dd52b64 Compare December 9, 2025 10:00
@lakchote lakchote changed the title [HOLD Auth#18611] Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page Use canReject property to determine if a transaction can be rejected in Reports page Dec 9, 2025
@lakchote
lakchote marked this pull request as ready for review December 9, 2025 10:20
@lakchote
lakchote requested review from a team as code owners December 9, 2025 10:20
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from JmillsExpensify and shubham1206agra and removed request for a team and shubham1206agra December 9, 2025 10:20
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Dec 9, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@shubham1206agra 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 a team and removed request for a team December 9, 2025 10:20
Comment thread src/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.ts Outdated
Comment thread src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx Outdated
@truph01

truph01 commented Dec 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified that the composer does not automatically focus or open the keyboard on mobile unless explicitly intended. This includes checking that returning the app from the background does not unexpectedly open the keyboard.
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: HybridApp
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: HybridApp
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • For any bug fix or new feature in this PR, I verified that sufficient unit tests are included to prevent regressions in this flow.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2025-12-11.at.18.27.14.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2025-12-11.at.18.21.48.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2025-12-11.at.18.24.47.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-12-11.at.18.19.53.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2025-12-11.at.18.16.40.mov

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from stitesExpensify December 11, 2025 11:29
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Dec 11, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@stitesExpensify 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]

@stitesExpensify stitesExpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM overall, just left a couple of NAB and questions

Comment thread src/components/MoneyReportHeader.tsx Outdated
Comment thread src/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.ts
Comment thread src/libs/TransactionUtils/index.ts
@stitesExpensify
stitesExpensify merged commit 10192b7 into main Dec 11, 2025
38 of 39 checks passed
@stitesExpensify
stitesExpensify deleted the lucien/use-canReject-from-search branch December 11, 2025 15:31
@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
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
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/stitesExpensify in version: 9.2.78-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/AndrewGable in version: 9.2.78-8 🚀

platform result
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🕸 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.

7 participants