-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.5k
[NoQA] Feature: Travel Invoicing - Release 2.1: Opening the Travel Invoicing Page #78963
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[NoQA] Feature: Travel Invoicing - Release 2.1: Opening the Travel Invoicing Page #78963
Conversation
|
Hey, I noticed you changed If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:
Alternatively, if you are an external contributor, you can run the translation script locally with your own OpenAI API key. To learn more, try running: npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --helpTypically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running |
Codecov Report✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!
|
|
@parasharrajat 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] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- Please add Manual Test steps to test the newly added section in the App.
|
@blimpich What do you suggest we do for this PR in terms of manual test steps, I didn't add any and added [NoQA] because this being Travel Invoicing - Release 2.1: Opening the Travel Invoicing Page and having this in the docs:
Which means we're basically not even showing the new section:
unless Travel Invoicing feed and beta are both existing / ON - otherwise we're showing whatever was being shown before aka this (which is noop):
We're doing this because BE is not ready yet and I want to be able to have this PR merged for when BE is ready for next stages of the release. |
…7-travel-invoicing-21
|
@parasharrajat I don't think we need manual testing here since this is all behind a beta. Manual testing can come later once we start gluing everything together and testing the feature end to end |
|
Asked for 🇪🇸 translations verification - awaiting confirmation before I remove [WIP] and ready for merge. |
parasharrajat
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- Did we add the new beta?
| ]; | ||
|
|
||
| const renderOptionItem = (item: ToggleSettingOptionRowProps, index: number) => ( | ||
| <Section |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Section inside section. May be not needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The Section component is actually needed here for proper layout and styling consistency - after reviewing your feedback about aligning with other pages like WorkspaceWorkflowsPage.tsx, I've made the following improvements:
- Added
isCentralPaneprop to theSectionas you suggested - this automatically handles the responsive padding (instead of manually calculatingisSmallScreenWidth ? styles.p5 : styles.p8), making the code cleaner and consistent with other workspace pages. - Why
Sectionis still needed: TheSectioncomponent inrenderOptionItemprovides the appropriate container styling for theToggleSettingOptionRow. Looking atWorkspaceWorkflowsPage.tsx, the same pattern is used -ToggleSettingOptionRowcomponents are wrapped inSectioncontainers (see lines ~429-450 whererenderOptionItemwraps toggle rows in styled containers).
The Section isn't redundant because:
- The parent container (
WorkspaceTravelInvoicingSection) returns a Fragment (<>...</>), not aSection - Each toggle section needs its own padding/styling boundary
- Using
isCentralPaneon eachSectionensures consistent styling across different screen sizes automatically
The key change is moving from manual padding calculation to using isCentralPane, which is the recommended approach per your suggestion ✅
| // pendingAction: policy?.pendingFields?.autoReporting ?? policy?.pendingFields?.autoReportingFrequency, | ||
| // errors: getLatestErrorField(policy ?? {}, CONST.POLICY.COLLECTION_KEYS.AUTOREPORTING), | ||
| // onCloseError: () => clearPolicyErrorField(route.params.policyID, CONST.POLICY.COLLECTION_KEYS.AUTOREPORTING), | ||
| subMenuItems: ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Here may be these needs to be just main menu items not sub menu items. is there a reason for creating submenu items...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, using subMenuItems here is intentional and follows an established pattern in the codebase (see WorkspaceWorkflowsPage.tsx for similar usage).
The key reason is that these items (Current Travel Spend, Current Travel Limit, Settlement Account, Settlement Frequency) are dependent settings of the Central Invoicing toggle - they should only be visible when Central Invoicing is enabled - using subMenuItems with ToggleSettingOptionRow provides this behavior out of the box:
- when the toggle is ON: sub-items are displayed
- when the toggle is OFF: sub-items are hidden
If these were rendered as separate main menu items, we would need to manually handle the conditional visibility logic, which would duplicate what ToggleSettingOptionRow already handles internally - the subMenuItems pattern keeps the code cleaner and makes the parent-child relationship explicit.
✅ This is consistent with how other workspace sections handle dependent settings (e.g., the Delayed Submission toggle in Workflows has dependent settings for submission frequency and schedule that use the same pattern).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then it is fine to keep it this way.
|
Left some comments. There is not much to review here except code, even though this pr has implementation logic. We will be better off testing it next PR, where we start implementing functionality. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
…7-travel-invoicing-21
✅ Yes, @allgandalf added it in this PR, and it's being used in this PR and the other ones related to travel invoicing. |
Good catch! ✅ Addressed all comments and native bug - ready for another review! |
|
Failing ❌ ESLint not related to this PR. |
|
ESLint logs are huge. Didn't find what is wrong there... Can you merge main and try to resolve it? I didn't notice it on other PRs today. |
parasharrajat
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
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 Issuessection 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
Testssection - I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the
QA stepssection - 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 verified the steps for local testing are in the
- 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 tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- 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 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.
toggleReportand notonIconClick). - 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 - 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 Copylabel 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
- 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.
- 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 usingAvatarhave 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.js 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
thisproperly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. foronClick={this.submit}the methodthis.submitshould be bound tothisin the constructor) - Any internal methods bound to
thisare necessary to be bound (i.e. avoidthis.submit = this.submit.bind(this);ifthis.submitis never passed to a component event handler likeonClick) - 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
Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris 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 form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added
Designlabel so the design team can review the changes.
- If a new page is added, I verified it's using the
ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page. - If the
mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps. - I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.
🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed
|
We can handle more testing scenarios in the next PRs. This is NoQA. |
|
🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/blimpich in version: 9.3.6-0 🚀
|





Explanation of Change
UX Flow
Data & Onyx
useOnyx(ONYXKEYS.COLLECTION.POLICY)using thepolicyIDfrom route params.TravelInvoicingUtilsmodule) to derive:getIsTravelInvoicingEnabled(policyID)– checks whether thePROGRAM_TRAVEL_USfeed inprivate_expensifyCardSettingsis enabled.hasTravelInvoicingSettlementAccount(policy)– checks for a configured settlement account for that feed.getTravelLimit(policy)– reads the limit value associated with the Travel feed.getTravelSpend(policy)– reads the current period spent for the Travel feed (or from a separate travel‑spend Onyx key provided by the backend).getTravelSettlementAccount(policy)– returns the display name / last 4 of the bank account.getTravelSettlementFrequency(policy)– returns the backend frequency value (e.g., monthly, weekly).Components & reuse
WorkspaceTravelInvoicingSection, implemented alongside the existing workspace settings pages (e.g.WorkspaceCardPageandWorkspaceBillsPage) and rendered withinWorkspaceTravelPage.WorkspaceCardSection) where possible (header row with toggle, summary “card” layout, sub‑rows for configuration).Section,MenuItem,FormWrapper, etc., consistent with otherWorkspacepages.Actions
Policy.open/Policy.fetchaction when coming back from a setup flow).Testing
We’ll create a new test file called
WorkspaceTravelInvoicingSectionText.tsxthat will test the following cases:getIsTravelInvoicingEnabled(policyID).Fixed Issues
$ #78673
PROPOSAL:
Tests
Right now - locally - in order to verify the new page UI - one can edit / comment out two blocks of code to be able to see the new section in Workspace Settings > Travel, see diff below.
Code diff
Offline tests
N/A
QA Steps
N/A
PR Author Checklist
### Fixed Issuessection aboveTestssectionOffline stepssectionQA stepssectioncanBeMissingparam foruseOnyxtoggleReportand notonIconClick)src/languages/*files and using the translation methodSTYLE.md) were followedAvatar, I verified the components usingAvatarare working as expected)StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))npm run compress-svg)Avataris modified, I verified thatAvataris working as expected in all cases)Designlabel and/or tagged@Expensify/designso the design team can review the changes.ScrollViewcomponent to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.mainbranch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to theTeststeps.Screenshots/Videos
MacOS: Chrome
iOS: HybridApp