Add backTo to many pages so it shows the correct screen below the RHP overlay

[bernhardoj]

Details

While we open a page from report RHP, refreshing will show the report screen below the report RHP instead of the search page. This PR fixes it.

Fixed Issues

$ #46773
PROPOSAL: #46773 (comment)

Tests

Same as QA Steps

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as QA Steps

QA Steps

Prerequisite: the account never dismisses hold educational page/modal yet
Web/Desktop

1. Submit a new expense
2. Open search page
3. Open the expense from step 1
4. Hold the expense. The hold educational page should show
5. Refresh the page
6. Verify the page behind the overlay is still the search page

Android/iOS/mWeb
Can't see page behind the RHP, so just make sure the hold educational modal still shows 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
  • 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 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.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 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.
• 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

androi.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android.mweb.mp4

iOS: Native

ios.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios.mweb.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web.mp4

MacOS: Desktop

desktop.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@rayane-djouah 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]

[bernhardoj]

Additional video for other pages:

Report settings:

web.settings.mp4

Money request view data:

web.money.request.data.mp4

Profile from message:

web.profile.mp4

Report field:

web.report.field.mp4

New task page:

web.task.mp4

[bernhardoj]

For this, I didn't add the backTo to the goBack fallback because it will go back to the expense report and will open the hold educational page again on mount.

App/src/pages/ProcessMoneyRequestHoldPage.tsx

Line 38 in f58439c

onBackButtonPress={() => Navigation.goBack()}

1. Open expense report/thread
2. Hold expense
3. Hold educational shows (stack: [expense report, hold educational])
4. Refresh (stack: [hold educational])
5. Go back. expense report/thread is mounted (stack: [expense report])
6. This logic is triggered
   

   App/src/components/MoneyRequestHeader.tsx

   Lines 99 to 118 in f58439c

   	useEffect(() => {
   	if (isLoadingHoldUseExplained) {
   	return;
   	}
   	setShouldShowHoldMenu(isOnHold && !dismissedHoldUseExplanation);
   	}, [dismissedHoldUseExplanation, isLoadingHoldUseExplained, isOnHold]);
   	useEffect(() => {
   	if (!shouldShowHoldMenu) {
   	return;
   	}
   	if (isSmallScreenWidth) {
   	if (Navigation.getActiveRoute().slice(1) === ROUTES.PROCESS_MONEY_REQUEST_HOLD) {
   	Navigation.goBack();
   	}
   	} else {
   	Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.PROCESS_MONEY_REQUEST_HOLD);
   	}
   	}, [isSmallScreenWidth, shouldShowHoldMenu]);

which opens the hold educational again.

[luacmartins]

Left a small comment

[rayane-djouah]

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 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. 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
  • 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.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 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.
• 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: Native

android_native.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_mweb_chrome.mp4

iOS: Native

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-09-20.at.01.21.33.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

Simulator.Screen.Recording.-.iPhone.15.Pro.Max.-.2024-09-20.at.01.19.52.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2024-09-20.at.1.15.45.AM.mov

Screen.Recording.2024-09-21.at.11.14.29.PM.mov

Screen.Recording.2024-09-21.at.11.23.49.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2024-09-20.at.1.17.42.AM.mov

[bernhardoj]

After merging with main, the page without params will now return undefined if we access route.params. It was an empty object before. So, I updated some pages to use null-safety.

[luacmartins]

LGTM

[rayane-djouah]

@bernhardoj - We still need to add backTo param to these routes (which are accessible from IOU reports or transaction reports in RHP):

• REPORT_AVATAR
• ATTACHMENTS
• REPORT_WITH_ID_DETAILS_EXPORT
• TRANSACTION_RECEIPT
• TRANSACTION_DUPLICATE_* (All)
• and for create flows (submit expense, track expense...) like you've done already with "assign task"

Note that in #47690 we will be adding the chat type to search, therefore more report-related routes will be accessible from RHP, therefore I think we need to add the backTo param to more routes like:

• ROOM_MEMBERS
• ROOM_INVITE
• REPORT_PARTICIPANTS_INVITE
• REPORT_PARTICIPANTS_DETAILS
• REPORT_PARTICIPANTS_ROLE_SELECTION
• REPORT_SETTINGS_NAME
• REPORT_SETTINGS_WRITE_CAPABILITY
• REPORT_SETTINGS_VISIBILITY

wdyt?

[rayane-djouah]

Please merge latest main. Thanks!

[bernhardoj]

Note that in #47690 we will be adding the chat type to search, therefore more report-related routes will be accessible from RHP, therefore I think we need to add the backTo param to more routes like:

I would prefer to wait for it to be merged so I can test it.

In the meantime, I'll add more backTo to these pages

REPORT_AVATAR
ATTACHMENTS
REPORT_WITH_ID_DETAILS_EXPORT
TRANSACTION_RECEIPT
TRANSACTION_DUPLICATE_* (All)
and for create flows (submit expense, track expense...) like you've done already with "assign task"

[bernhardoj]

1. Adding backTo for these pages doesn't help. backTo is currently only for RHP.
   REPORT_AVATAR
   ATTACHMENTS
   TRANSACTION_RECEIPT

2. Done
   REPORT_WITH_ID_DETAILS_EXPORT
   TRANSACTION_DUPLICATE_* (All)

and for create flows (submit expense, track expense...) like you've done already with "assign task"

3. First of all, only submit and track is available on expense report. Adding backTo for these pages is currently "useless". As you can see on the video below, when the page is mounted, the tab screen overrides the route (internally done by the tab navigator) which doesn't contains the backTo. So, refreshing the page will show report screen instead of search page.

web.mp4

[rayane-djouah]

Let's add backTo param to FLAG_COMMENT route

[luacmartins]

@bernhardoj we also have conflicts

[bernhardoj]

I think we can keep it optional, otherwise I need to re-check all ROUTES to see which backTo can be optional or not. backTo by pattern is also optional.

Oops! Just found a bug:

Fixed.

[rayane-djouah]

Confirmed that #47990 (review) is fixed 👍

[rayane-djouah]

I think we can keep it optional, otherwise I need to re-check all ROUTES to see which backTo can be optional or not. backTo by pattern is also optional.

@luacmartins Do you agree?

[rayane-djouah]

LGTM and tests well 👍

[rayane-djouah]

@bernhardoj we have conflicts

[bernhardoj]

Fixed

[rayane-djouah]

@bernhardoj Tests are failing https://github.com/Expensify/App/actions/runs/10999717107/job/30540500726?pr=47990

[rayane-djouah]

I don't see how this PR could be causing the failing tests. I also noticed that the tests were already failing on the main branch for some merge commits (e.g., #49606), so this might be a flaky test.

[luacmartins]

Those tests seem broken on main too. Seeing the same on other PRs.

[rayane-djouah]

@luacmartins this is ready for final review if you agree that we can keep the backTo param optional

[luacmartins]

@bernhardoj we have conflicts.

[bernhardoj]

@luacmartins conflicts fixed

[luacmartins]

Yes, we can keep the backTo param optional. ESLint errors are unrelated. Merging.

[melvin-bot]

@luacmartins looks like this was merged without a test passing. Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

[OSBotify]

✋ 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]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.0.41-0 🚀

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

[github-actions]

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.0.41-10 🚀

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