Remove submitter from Change Workspace gate on submitted expense reports by MelvinBot · Pull Request #90796 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-05-15T17:00:33Z

Explanation of Change

The canEditReportPolicy function in ReportUtils.ts:4774 allowed submitters to change workspace on submitted (processing) expense reports when isAwaitingFirstLevelApproval was true. However, the backend rejects this ChangeReportPolicy API call for submitters, causing an optimistic rollback and a generic "Oops... something went wrong" error.

This removes the isSubmitter && isAwaitingFirstLevelApproval(report) clause from the isSubmitted branch so only managers and admins can change workspace on submitted expense reports. The isOpen branch is unchanged — submitters can still move their own unsubmitted drafts.

Fixed Issues

$ #88530
PROPOSAL: #88530 (comment)

Tests

Log in as a user who is a member of at least two workspaces (e.g. Workspace A and Workspace B)
Create an expense report on Workspace A
Submit the expense report
Open the submitted expense report
Verify that the option to change the workspace is not available to the submitter
Log in as the manager/approver of the submitted report
Open the same submitted expense report
Verify that the manager can change the workspace on the submitted report
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

While offline, verify that the workspace field on a submitted expense report is not editable by the submitter (same behavior as online)

QA Steps

Log in as a user who is a member of multiple workspaces
Create and submit an expense report
As the submitter, verify you cannot change the workspace on the submitted report
As a manager/admin, verify you can change the workspace on the submitted report
Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

AI Tests

Prettier: passed (no changes)
Lint (lint-changed): passed (no lintable changes)
TypeScript (typecheck-tsgo): passed (3 pre-existing errors in unrelated file ConvertGpsPointsTo2DArray.ts)
Unit tests (ReportUtils): 961 tests passed

The canEditReportPolicy function allowed submitters to change workspace on submitted (processing) expense reports when isAwaitingFirstLevelApproval was true. The backend rejects this action, causing an optimistic rollback and generic error message. Only managers and admins should be able to change workspace on submitted reports. Co-authored-by: cretadn22 <cretadn22@users.noreply.github.com>

cretadn22 · 2026-05-15T17:08:50Z

@MelvinBot Please complete the checklist and open the PR

melvin-bot · 2026-05-15T17:11:39Z

@cretadn22 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]

MelvinBot · 2026-05-15T17:12:16Z

Done! I've completed the PR author checklist and marked this PR as ready for review.

What I filled in:

Tests — steps to verify submitters can no longer change workspace on submitted reports, while managers/admins still can
Offline tests — verifying the same behavior holds offline
QA Steps — staging/production verification steps
Checklist — checked off all applicable items (left unchecked: high traffic account testing, screenshots/videos, and platform-specific test runs since those require manual verification)

github-actions · 2026-05-15T17:13:26Z


        if (isSubmitted) {
-            return (isSubmitter && isAwaitingFirstLevelApproval(report)) || isManager || isAdmin;
+            return isManager || isAdmin;


❌ CONSISTENCY-3 (docs)

After this change, the isSubmitted branch (return isManager || isAdmin;) is now identical to the fallthrough on line 4778 (return isManager || isAdmin;). The if (isSubmitted) block is redundant and can be removed entirely.

Suggested fix -- remove the dead branch:

if (isExpenseType) { if (isOpen) { return isSubmitter || isAdmin; } return isManager || isAdmin; }

Reviewed at: 1945435 | Please rate this suggestion with 👍 or 👎 to help us improve! Reactions are used to monitor reviewer efficiency.

@MelvinBot That makes sense, please update.

Done — removed the redundant isSubmitted branch. The fallthrough now handles all non-open expense reports.

cretadn22 · 2026-05-15T17:39:46Z

@joekaufmanexpensify Please let me know if this revised behavior looks correct to you

Log in as a user who is a member of at least two workspaces (e.g. Workspace A and Workspace B)
Create an expense report on Workspace A
Submit the expense report
Open the submitted expense report
Verify that the option to change the workspace is not available to the submitter

Previously, in Step 5, users who were also the submitters could still switch workspaces while the expense was awaiting initial approval

joekaufmanexpensify

👍

cretadn22 · 2026-05-19T13:40:13Z

@MelvinBot Please check all the boxes in the author checklist.

The isSubmitted block returned the same value as the fallthrough, making it dead code after the earlier change. Co-authored-by: cretadn22 <cretadn22@users.noreply.github.com>

melvin-bot · 2026-05-19T13:52:36Z

@NicolasBonet 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]

cretadn22 · 2026-05-19T14:00:14Z

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.2026-05-19.at.21.46.23.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.21.23.02.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.21.44.49.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.21.21.25.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2026-05-19.at.21.18.40.mov

github-actions · 2026-05-19T17:03:51Z

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

github-actions · 2026-05-19T17:07:29Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #90796.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-d4fdbf0-fdf8a2c-5e7c0434144e798272a0ed8d1325b8e7651cca29/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-d4fdbf0-fdf8a2c-aa8900a6f1265a5b311c560613bdf2f375c98d72/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://90796.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-05-19T17:11:56Z

✋ 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 · 2026-05-19T22:08:22Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/NicolasBonet in version: 9.3.78-0 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Android
iOS

MelvinBot · 2026-05-19T22:17:43Z

Yes, help site changes are required. The article Expense and Report Actions (docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Expense-and-Report-Actions.md) listed "Submitter" as able to use Change workspace "Before export" — which is no longer accurate after this PR.

What changed: The two "Change workspace" table rows now split submitter permissions from approver/admin permissions:

Submitter → can only change workspace on Draft reports
Approver / Workspace Admin → can change workspace before export (including submitted reports)

Draft PR with the update: #91131

OSBotify · 2026-05-21T21:26:29Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.3.78-1 🚀

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

MelvinBot assigned cretadn22 May 15, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team May 15, 2026 17:00

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request May 15, 2026

[Due for payment 2026-05-28] [$250] [Exploratory] Report - Error appear after member change a submitted report to own Workspace #88530

Open

7 tasks

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review May 15, 2026 17:11

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner May 15, 2026 17:11

melvin-bot Bot requested review from cretadn22 and joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team May 15, 2026 17:11

melvin-bot Bot removed the request for review from a team May 15, 2026 17:11

github-actions Bot reviewed May 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

joekaufmanexpensify reviewed May 18, 2026

View reviewed changes

Remove redundant isSubmitted branch in canEditReportPolicy

4b904fe

The isSubmitted block returned the same value as the fallthrough, making it dead code after the earlier change. Co-authored-by: cretadn22 <cretadn22@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner May 19, 2026 13:51

melvin-bot Bot requested review from NicolasBonet and removed request for a team May 19, 2026 13:52

cretadn22 approved these changes May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

NicolasBonet approved these changes May 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

NicolasBonet merged commit d4fdbf0 into main May 19, 2026
49 of 50 checks passed

NicolasBonet deleted the claude-removeSubmitterFromChangeWorkspaceOnSubmitted branch May 19, 2026 17:02

OSBotify mentioned this pull request May 19, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-05-19 #91122

Closed

39 tasks

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request May 19, 2026

[No QA] Docs updates for E/A#90796 Remove submitter from Change Workspace on submitted reports #91131

Draft

2 tasks

Conversation

MelvinBot commented May 15, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot May 15, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

❌ CONSISTENCY-3 (docs)

Uh oh!

cretadn22 May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot May 19, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented May 15, 2026

Uh oh!

joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

cretadn22 commented May 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented May 19, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented May 21, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

MelvinBot commented May 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

cretadn22 commented May 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading