feat: Support partial approval from Reports page by nkdengineer · Pull Request #85194 · Expensify/App

nkdengineer · 2026-03-13T07:28:37Z

Explanation of Change

feat: Support partial approval from Reports page

Fixed Issues

$ #78046
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Precondition: Approval is enabled

Create a new empty report
Create two expenses and hold one of them
Submit the report
Go Reports > Reports/Approve
Verify that the Approve button appears on this report
Click on Approve button
Verify that the hold menu modal appears
Select the approve partial option
Verify that the hold expense is moved to another report.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same as test

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

Screen.Recording.2026-03-13.at.14.20.19.mov

melvin-bot · 2026-03-13T07:36:59Z

@eVoloshchak 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]

codecov · 2026-03-13T07:44:24Z

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
...arch/SearchList/ListItem/ExpenseReportListItem.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/components/Search/SearchList/index.tsx	`55.81% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/SearchUIUtils.ts	`63.71% <100.00%> (-0.07%)`	⬇️
src/libs/actions/Search.ts	`27.92% <100.00%> (+0.61%)`	⬆️
src/components/Search/index.tsx	`0.89% <0.00%> (-0.03%)`	⬇️
... and 5 files with indirect coverage changes

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 2b784e8765

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".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-03-13T07:51:18Z

+            if (hasHeldExpense) {
+                onHoldMenuOpen?.(item as TransactionReportGroupListItemType, CONST.IOU.REPORT_ACTION_TYPE.APPROVE);
+                return;


Add fallback when hold-menu callback is absent

The new approve-with-hold path returns immediately after onHoldMenuOpen?.(...), but that callback is optional and several existing callers still omit it (for example src/components/SelectionListWithSections/Search/TransactionListItem.tsx calls handleActionButtonPress without onHoldMenuOpen). Because this same commit also allows APPROVE on held reports in getActions(), those call sites can now show an Approve action that does nothing (no navigation and no approval request) when a held expense is present.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@nkdengineer thoughts on this comment?

I updated to call goToItem if onHoldMenuOpen is not present.

trjExpensify

@puneetlath you closed the parent issue, are we actually proceeding with this? #78046 (comment)

puneetlath · 2026-03-13T15:05:39Z

Ok, reopened.

eVoloshchak · 2026-03-20T10:53:53Z

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 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.2026-03-20.at.12.13.08.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-03-20.at.12.09.37.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-03-20.at.12.04.27.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-20.at.11.59.14.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-03-20.at.11.56.31.mov

eVoloshchak

LGTM!

puneetlath · 2026-03-23T17:56:06Z

    const snapshotPolicy = mockSnapshotForItem?.data?.[`${ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY}${mockReportItemWithHold.policyID}`] ?? {};

-    test('Should navigate to item when report has one transaction on hold', () => {
+    test('Should not navigate to item when report has one transaction on hold and action is approve', () => {


Should we also test that the Hold modal is shown? And test what happens when the two different buttons on the modal are pressed?

@puneetlath I updated the test to verify the onHoldMenuOpen callback is called.

puneetlath · 2026-03-23T17:56:33Z

Left a couple comments. Also there are conflicts. @trjExpensify are you good with going forward with this functionality? If so, mind updating your review?

trjExpensify · 2026-03-24T01:04:52Z

I'm cool with it, though I do find it a bit strange now that you see this Approve action button, but you can't use the select menu to take the same action that's in view. Shouldn't that be available now and work the same way?

puneetlath · 2026-04-02T15:37:11Z

I'm cool with it, though I do find it a bit strange now that you see this Approve action button, but you can't use the select menu to take the same action that's in view. Shouldn't that be available now and work the same way?

Interesting. Why is this @nkdengineer? Is that just because it's a separate thing we need to implement?

nkdengineer · 2026-04-02T15:39:58Z

@puneetlath We discussed this in the issue and decided to keep the bulk action as it's here.

nkdengineer · 2026-04-21T06:04:43Z

@puneetlath Any thoughts on my comment above?

nkdengineer · 2026-04-28T02:30:18Z

@puneetlath Friendly bump.

puneetlath · 2026-04-28T15:54:25Z

Sorry for the delay. I re-read the context and I'm ok with going forward with this as-is in the PR. I think we should follow-up with making it possible via bulk-select as well, but it's a bigger project given the considerations, so I think we should just go forward with this for now. Can you go ahead and fix the conflicts @nkdengineer?

Does that work for you @trjExpensify? If so, mind updating your review?

nkdengineer · 2026-04-29T07:52:28Z

Can you go ahead and fix the conflicts @nkdengineer?

Done.

puneetlath · 2026-04-29T17:49:59Z

ESLint is failing @nkdengineer

trjExpensify

I'm cool with doing the bulk select as a follow-up. 👍

puneetlath · 2026-04-30T19:36:05Z

@nkdengineer bump on the eslint issue.

nkdengineer · 2026-05-05T03:39:38Z

@puneetlath I fixed

puneetlath · 2026-05-05T14:43:47Z

Thanks @nkdengineer but there are conflicts now.

OSBotify · 2026-05-05T15:45:48Z

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

github-actions · 2026-05-05T16:50:54Z

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

github-actions · 2026-05-05T17:17:54Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #85194.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-8526bac-8c72c50-7d0cf63e0dcfffb0b5d7f72ea1ff9f919f4b2dbd/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-8526bac-8c72c50-d8742911ff37c43231e033fd42a5ad745626aa9c/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://85194.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-05-05T19:16:40Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.3.67-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-05-05T19:20:02Z

🤖 Help site update needed — draft PR created.

PR #85194 adds partial approval support from the Reports page for reports with held expenses. The existing Approve-Expenses.md article didn't document what happens when approving a report that contains held expenses.

Changes made to Approve-Expenses.md:

Added a new section: "How to approve a report that contains held expenses" — explains the confirmation modal with two options (approve only non-held amount vs. approve full amount)
Added an FAQ entry: "What happens to held expenses when I partially approve a report?"

Draft PR: #89640
Please mark it as "Ready for review" when it is ready for review.

feat: Support partial approval from Reports page

8d0212a

melvin-bot Bot assigned nkdengineer Mar 13, 2026

update test

2b784e8

nkdengineer marked this pull request as ready for review March 13, 2026 07:36

nkdengineer requested review from a team as code owners March 13, 2026 07:36

melvin-bot Bot requested review from eVoloshchak and removed request for a team March 13, 2026 07:36

melvin-bot Bot requested review from trjExpensify and removed request for a team March 13, 2026 07:37

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed Mar 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

trjExpensify requested changes Mar 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

eVoloshchak reviewed Mar 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/components/Search/index.tsx

nkdengineer added 2 commits March 18, 2026 13:51

resolve conflict

776d4f4

update holdMenuParams to a ref

63ee984

resolve conflict

5b6dfe2

eVoloshchak approved these changes Mar 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from puneetlath March 20, 2026 11:14

puneetlath reviewed Mar 23, 2026

View reviewed changes

nkdengineer added 4 commits March 25, 2026 15:46

resolve conflict

63ce308

add unit test

b19bbaf

goToItem when onHoldMenuOpen callback is undefined

f2a300e

update test

100c4d4

nkdengineer added 2 commits April 29, 2026 14:40

resolve conflict

40cf57a

fix ts

6c99580

puneetlath previously approved these changes Apr 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

trjExpensify previously approved these changes Apr 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

eVoloshchak approved these changes Apr 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from puneetlath April 29, 2026 20:57

resolve conflict

b6fed9f

nkdengineer dismissed stale reviews from trjExpensify and puneetlath via b6fed9f May 5, 2026 03:14

fix eslint

07e8c4e

resolve conflict

ec2d292

puneetlath approved these changes May 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

puneetlath merged commit 8526bac into Expensify:main May 5, 2026
34 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request May 5, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-05-05 #89627

Open

84 tasks

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request May 5, 2026

Docs updates for E/A#85194 Add partial approval from Reports page #89640

Draft

Conversation

nkdengineer commented Mar 13, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Mar 13, 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!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Mar 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

puneetlath Mar 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Mar 13, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

eVoloshchak commented Mar 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

eVoloshchak left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

puneetlath Mar 23, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

nkdengineer Mar 25, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Mar 23, 2026

Uh oh!

trjExpensify commented Mar 24, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Apr 2, 2026

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Apr 2, 2026

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Apr 21, 2026

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Apr 28, 2026

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented Apr 29, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Apr 29, 2026

Uh oh!

trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Apr 30, 2026

Uh oh!

nkdengineer commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 5, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 5, 2026

codecov Bot commented Mar 13, 2026 •

edited by github-actions Bot

Loading

eVoloshchak commented Mar 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading