Repository navigation
Reports - Back button on split overview reopens split overview after returning from split row #78587
Description
If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email contributors@expensify.com to request to join our Slack channel!
Version Number: 9.2.89-1
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: No
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from BrowserStack: #78382
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): applausetester+291201kh@applause.expensifail.com
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Bug source: Exploratory - Significant User Experience Deterioration
Device used: Mac 26.1 / Chrome
App Component: Search
Action Performed:
- Go to staging.new.expensify.com
- Go to workspace chat.
- Create an expense.
- Go to Reports > Expenses.
- Select the expense via dropdown > Split.
- Click on any split row.
- Click RHP back button.
- Click RHP back button.
Expected Result:
RHP will close.
Actual Result:
Split overview reopens.
Workaround:
Unknown
Platforms:
- Android: App
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: App
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- iOS: mWeb Chrome
- Windows: Chrome
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Activity
melvin-bot commentedon Dec 30, 2025
You have been assigned to this deploy blocker because you recently merged this PR: #78382
melvin-bot commentedon Dec 30, 2025
💬 A slack conversation has been started in #expensify-open-source
melvin-bot commentedon Dec 30, 2025
Triggered auto assignment to @garrettmknight (
Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.github-actions commentedon Dec 30, 2025
👋 Friendly reminder that deploy blockers are time-sensitive ⏱ issues! Check out the open `StagingDeployCash` deploy checklist to see the list of PRs included in this release, then work quickly to do one of the following:
thienlnam commentedon Dec 31, 2025
Appears to come from #78382 - cc @daledah @ikevin127
ikevin127 commentedon Dec 31, 2025
@daledah When will you be available to raise a follow-up ? Please let us know!
daledah commentedon Dec 31, 2025
Please assign me. I'll raise PR soon
daledah commentedon Dec 31, 2025
@thienlnam @ikevin127 we have the follow up PR here. This issue might be due to a conflict. Because when we create a previous PR, this commit have already changed the
SPLIT_EXPENSEroute, leading to inconsistencies.ikevin127 commentedon Dec 31, 2025
@daledah Are you saying that:
This issue was not directly caused by our PRs changes and if we were to revert back to just after our PR was merged - we wouldn't be able to reproduce the issue ?
Before we merged our PR, you merged main which brought somebody elses changes (commit) that actually caused this issue - and without that commit the issue would not be reproducible on our PR alone ?
Trying to figure out whether this regression is on us or not - like if we could've caught it before merge 🤔
daledah commentedon Dec 31, 2025
@ikevin127 I don’t think this should be considered a regression caused by my PR, because the issue in the split page already existed before. When the bug was fixed in the split page, we ended up creating a different route for it, which resulted in the bug not being fixed for the new route.
mountiny commentedon Dec 31, 2025
To avoid spending more money on another C+ reviewing the fix, I would propose to proceed with a revert to unblock the deploy and you can raise the new PR with a new fix included, you can just copy the test cases and video over to the new PR
m-natarajan commentedon Dec 31, 2025
Not repro in MacOS Monterey / Chrome Web v9.2.89-4
Screen.Recording.2025-12-31.at.16.24.40.mp4
Still reproduces, Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 / Android 12, App v9.2.89-3
Screenrecorder-2025-12-31-16-34-35-584.mp4
m-natarajan commentedon Dec 31, 2025
Not repro, Xiaomi Redmi Note 10 / Android 12, App v9.2.89-3
Screenrecorder-2025-12-31-17-02-12-918.mp4
ikevin127 commentedon Dec 31, 2025
@daledah Well I guess since the PR was reverted we should proceed as instructed in #78587 (comment), then when payment will be due for the rework PR we'll have to demonstrate that this regression / revert wasn't caused by our PR directly - this in order to not get a bounty penalty - otherwise we'll get a penalty.