Skip to content

warn when leaving a workspace with reports to approve - #101352

Merged
blimpich merged 2 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
dukenv0307:fix/98764-part-2
Sep 17, 2026
Merged

blimpich merged 2 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
dukenv0307:fix/98764-part-2

Conversation

@dukenv0307

@dukenv0307 dukenv0307 commented Sep 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

warn when leaving a workspace with reports to approve

Fixed Issues

$ #98764
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Preconditions:

  1. User is an Admin of a Control Workspace
  2. At least one other member is added to the Workspace
  3. Workflow / Approvals are enabled for the workspace

STR:

  1. Navigate to the Workspace chat
  2. Create a manual expense and submit
  3. Open the newly created expense report
  4. Navigate to report details
  5. Click More > Change approver
  6. Select the workspace member as approver
  7. As a member: Leave the workspace
  8. Verify that the warning modal Leave - Backward Approver Edit Access? is shown
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

Same as above

  • 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 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)
  • 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)
  • 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.
  • 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
Screen.Recording.2026-09-16.at.16.41.11.mov
Screenshot 2026-09-16 at 16 41 57

@dukenv0307
dukenv0307 marked this pull request as ready for review September 16, 2026 15:19
@dukenv0307
dukenv0307 requested review from a team as code owners September 16, 2026 15:19
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from heyjennahay and rojiphil and removed request for a team and heyjennahay September 16, 2026 15:19
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Sep 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@rojiphil 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 removed the request for review from a team September 16, 2026 15:19
Comment thread src/components/Tables/WorkspaceListTable/LeaveWorkspaceFlow.tsx Outdated
Comment thread src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceOverviewPage.tsx Outdated
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Sep 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...s/Tables/WorkspaceListTable/LeaveWorkspaceFlow.tsx 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
...c/hooks/useIsApproverOfOutstandingPolicyReports.ts 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/WorkspacesSettingsUtils.ts 49.38% <100.00%> (+0.63%) ⬆️
src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceOverviewPage.tsx 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 65 files with indirect coverage changes

Comment thread src/components/Tables/WorkspaceListTable/LeaveWorkspaceFlow.tsx Outdated

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 283b1a4ca4

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread src/pages/workspace/WorkspaceOverviewPage.tsx Outdated
@rojiphil

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dukenv0307 Why is the BE taking time to reassign the approver? In the attached screenshot, we can see that the BE took ~16 minutes to do the task.

Screenshot 2026-09-17 at 2 39 07 PM

@rojiphil

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

In the attached screenshot, we can see that the BE took ~16 minutes to do the task.

And that doesn't happen this time.

Screenshot 2026-09-17 at 2 47 58 PM

@rojiphil

rojiphil commented Sep 17, 2026

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 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 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)
  • 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)
  • 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.
  • 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
101352-android-hybrid-001.mp4
Android: mWeb Chrome
101352-mweb-chrome-003.mp4
iOS: HybridApp
101352-ios-hybrid-004.mp4
iOS: mWeb Safari
101047-mweb-safari-003.mp4
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
101047-web-chrome-004.mp4

@rojiphil rojiphil 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.

Thanks @dukenv0307. LGTM except for the concern in #101352 (comment).

@blimpich FE changes LGTM. All yours for review. Thanks.

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested a review from blimpich September 17, 2026 14:19
@blimpich
blimpich merged commit e8445e0 into Expensify:main Sep 17, 2026
36 of 38 checks passed
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@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/blimpich in version: 9.4.82-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot

MelvinBot commented Sep 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🤖 Yes — help site changes are required. Draft PR: Docs updates for E/A#101352 Document leaving a workspace and approver warning

This PR broadened when the leave-workspace approver warning appears. Previously it showed only for someone set as an approver in the workspace's approval workflow (isPolicyApprover). Now it also shows when any non-archived report in the workspace is pending that member's approval — including reports routed to them with Change approver, which never touches the workflow config.

App/docs/articles had no coverage of a member leaving a workspace, so there was nowhere that warning was explained. Add-Approvals.md documented approver reassignment only for an admin removing an approver, not for a member removing themselves.

What the draft PR changes

File Change
workspaces/Leave-a-Workspace.md New article — how to leave from the Workspaces list and the workspace Overview page, what each leave confirmation message means and the order Expensify picks between them, when the approver message appears (including the Change approver case), and what happens after you leave
workspaces/Add-Approvals.md Adds "An approver leaves the workspace" to the FAQ list of automatic reassignment triggers
workspaces/Managing-Workspace-Members.md Note under Remove Workspace Members that members can remove themselves, linking to the new article
UI label verification and authoring notes

Written against docs/HELPSITE_NAMING_CONVENTIONS.md, docs/HELP_AUTHORING_GUIDELINES.md, and docs/TEMPLATE.md: one workflow per article, single # title plus # FAQ, task-based ## headings only, internalScope metadata, relative cross-links outside numbered steps, three dots written as (⋮).

Verified in the live web app: the Workspaces navigation tab, the Overview and Members items in the workspace settings menu, and the More dropdown on the workspace Overview page.

Not reachable in the live app: the leave action is gated behind !isOwner, and the test account owns its only workspace. So Leave, the Leave [workspace name]? modal title, and the Leave / Cancel / Got it buttons come from common.leave, common.leaveWorkspaceTitle, common.cancel, and common.buttonConfirm in src/languages/en.ts rather than from a live screenshot — worth a second look during review.

The article also documents the full message precedence from getLeaveWorkspaceConfirmationPrompt: reimburser (blocked) → technical contact → preferred exporter → approver → workspace admin → auditor → member.

One claim to confirm: the article and the Add-Approvals.md FAQ entry state that reports pending with a leaving approver are reassigned to the workspace owner. That mirrors the in-app copy and the existing removal behavior already documented, but the reassignment itself is backend behavior this PR doesn't change, so please confirm it holds for self-removal.

npm run spell-changed passes on all three files.

@dukenv0307, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review


view run · no recording available

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.86-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.4.89-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.4.89-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

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