Skip to content

Implement invoice fields feature - #93317

Merged
mollfpr merged 36 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
ShridharGoel:invoiceFields2
Sep 9, 2026
Merged

mollfpr merged 36 commits into
Expensify:mainfrom
ShridharGoel:invoiceFields2

Conversation

@ShridharGoel

@ShridharGoel ShridharGoel commented Jun 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Explanation of Change

Implement invoice fields feature.

Fixed Issues

$ #72584
PROPOSAL: #72584 (comment)

Tests

  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console
  1. Go to workspace settings.
  2. Turn on invoices.
  3. Go to invoices tab.
  4. Verify that the invoice fields section is visible.
  5. Add a new field.
  6. Try to edit an added field.
  7. Create an invoice and verify that the invoice fields are visible.

Precondition:
Enable Invoices in workspace settings.
Enable Invoice fields and create any field.

  1. Go to Workspaces tab.
  2. Click 3-dot menu next to the workspace with invoices enabled.
  3. Click Duplicate workspace.
  4. Click Next > Continue.
  5. Open the duplicated workspace.
  6. Go to Invoices.
  7. Invoice fields will be enabled after duplicating workspace with invoice fields.

  1. Go to workspace settings > Invoices.
  2. Enable Invoice fields and upgrade workspace if needed.
  3. Click Add field.
  4. Create a text report field.
  5. Go to workspace settings > Reports.
  6. Enable Report fields.
  7. Create a text report field, then delete it.
  8. Go to workspace settings > Invoices.
  9. Invoice report field will remain unaffected after deleting non-invoice report field.

Offline tests

QA Steps

Same.

  • 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 verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
  • 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
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.1.01.56.AM.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.1.00.25.AM.mov
iOS: Native
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.12.55.40.AM.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.12.58.09.AM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.12.09.10.AM.mov
Screen.Recording.2026-02-02.at.12.12.09.AM.mov

@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Hey, I noticed you changed src/languages/en.ts in a PR from a fork. For security reasons, translations are not generated automatically for PRs from forks.

If you want to automatically generate translations for other locales, an Expensify employee will have to:

  1. Look at the code and make sure there are no malicious changes.
  2. Run the Generate static translations GitHub workflow. If you have write access and the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

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 --help

Typically, you'd want to translate only what you changed by running npx ts-node ./scripts/generateTranslations.ts --compare-ref main

@ShridharGoel ShridharGoel changed the title Implement invoice fields Implement invoice fields feature Jun 11, 2026
@ShridharGoel
ShridharGoel marked this pull request as ready for review June 11, 2026 17:49
@ShridharGoel
ShridharGoel requested review from a team as code owners June 11, 2026 17:49
@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from rojiphil and removed request for a team June 11, 2026 17:49
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Jun 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@rojiphil 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]

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team June 11, 2026 17:50

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 02d9d2a73b

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".

@joekaufmanexpensify joekaufmanexpensify left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

good for product 👍

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Jun 24, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ Changes either increased or maintained existing code coverage, great job!

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
src/CONST/index.ts 91.22% <ø> (ø)
src/SCREENS.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
...rc/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyReportView.tsx 96.00% <100.00%> (ø)
src/libs/API/types.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/CopyPolicySettingsUtils.ts 88.53% <100.00%> (+0.07%) ⬆️
...gation/linkingConfig/RELATIONS/WORKSPACE_TO_RHP.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts 71.42% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/PolicyUtils.ts 79.73% <ø> (+0.07%) ⬆️
src/libs/actions/RequestConflictUtils.ts 100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/pages/inbox/HeaderView.tsx 95.05% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 50 more
... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

@ShridharGoel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@rojiphil Can you have a look?

# Conflicts:
#	src/components/AvatarWithDisplayName.tsx
#	src/components/MoneyRequestReportView/MoneyRequestViewReportFields.tsx
#	src/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyReportView.tsx
#	src/libs/ReportUtils.ts
#	src/pages/ShareCodePage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/CreateReportFieldsPage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/InitialListValueSelector/DynamicReportFieldsInitialListValuePage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/InitialListValueSelector/index.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsAddListValuePage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsEditValuePage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsInitialValuePage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsListValuesPage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsSettingsPage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/ReportFieldsValueSettingsPage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/TypeSelector/TypeSelectorPage.tsx
#	src/pages/workspace/reports/WorkspaceReportsPage.tsx
#	tests/unit/ReportUtilsTest.ts
@rojiphil

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ShridharGoel Quite a lot of code to process here and additional issues as mentioned here to resolve. Let us start nibbling from one corner.

Starting with #93224, I can still reproduce the issue as the receiver does not see the invoice field. What do you think is the root cause for this?

93224-issue-001.mp4

Invoice receivers lack the invoice-fields flag in their reduced policy. Use report data for invoice visibility while preserving the expense field gate.
@ShridharGoel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@rojiphil Can you check now?

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

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

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot added the Emergency label Sep 9, 2026
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mollfpr looks like this was merged without a test passing. These checks had not passed on 6a5a825 when it was merged:

Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

@mollfpr

mollfpr commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ShridharGoel @rojiphil I just noticed that this PR has changes on .github/actions/javascript/proposalPoliceComment/index.js and .github/actions/javascript/isDeployChecklistLocked/index.js, what is the change for?

@mollfpr mollfpr removed the Emergency label Sep 9, 2026
@mollfpr

mollfpr commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Not an emergency, the failing test because the change on GH actions file.

@ShridharGoel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Looks like that happened during merging main / conflict resolution some days back. But reverting in #100684

mollfpr pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2026
mollfpr added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 9, 2026
…ctions

[No QA] Revert accidental .github changes from #93317
@mollfpr

mollfpr commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Thanks @ShridharGoel!

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Sep 9, 2026
83 tasks done
@OSBotify

OSBotify commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/mollfpr in version: 9.4.75-0 🚀

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

@MelvinBot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Yes — help site changes are required. Nothing under docs/articles covered invoice fields, and the Report Fields article contradicted the new behavior.

Draft PR: #100753

What this PR changed that the docs missed

  1. A new workspace setting exists with no article. WorkspaceInvoiceFieldsSection adds an Invoice fields section to Workspaces > [Workspace Name] > Invoices, gated on the Control plan via UPGRADE_FEATURE_INTRO_MAPPING.invoiceFields. No help article mentioned it.
  2. Report fields and invoices were split apart. The Reports page now filters to expense-target fields only (WorkspaceReportsPage.tsx:185), and duplicate/copy splits fieldList by target. Enable-Report-Fields.md still implied report fields cover every report type.
  3. Existing report-field steps drifted from the UI. The article said Add Field, Field Type, List Values, and Add Values; the UI says Add field, Type, List values, and Add value. It also never listed the Formula type, which the shared type selector offers.

Docs changes

File Change
docs/articles/new-expensify/workspaces/Enable-Invoice-Fields.md New article: who can use Invoice fields, enabling it (including the Control upgrade prompt), adding, editing, and deleting fields, what happens after, and an FAQ
docs/articles/new-expensify/workspaces/Enable-Report-Fields.md Notes report fields don't appear on invoices, links to the new article, corrects field-creation labels, adds Formula
docs/articles/new-expensify/reports-and-expenses/Send-an-Invoice.md One FAQ entry pointing invoice senders at the new article

UI verification

Every label came from the running app, not the diff — an app-web-tester run created a workspace, enabled Invoices, upgraded to Control through the invoice fields prompt, created a field, and opened its settings.

Verified labels
Element Label
More features toggle (under Earn) Invoices
Workspace menu item / page title Invoices
Section header on the Invoices page Invoice fields
Section subtitle "Invoice fields can be helpful when you'd like to include extra information."
Upgrade prompt title / actions Invoice fields, Upgrade, Got it, thanks
Add-field button and page title Add field
Field rows Name, Type, Initial value, List values
Type options Text, Date, List, Formula
List value button Add value
Save / delete actions Save, Delete

Two calls I made, in case you disagree

  • Duplicate-Workspace.md and Copy-Workspace-Settings.md need no change. Invoice fields ride along with the existing Invoices selection rather than becoming a new selectable item (WorkspaceDuplicateSelectFeaturesForm.tsx:261), and Copy Workspace Settings already covers the Control upgrade prompt generically. The new article's FAQ documents the carry-over instead.
  • I kept Enable-Report-Fields.md minimal. It predates the current authoring guidelines and uses multiple # headings and Title Case feature names. I changed only what this PR made wrong rather than restructuring it. Tell me if you'd rather it be brought fully into compliance here.

One thing I could not run: cspell was blocked in this environment, so spelling is validated by CI on the docs PR rather than locally.

@ShridharGoel, please review the linked help site PR and confirm it reflects the current behavior. Then mark the linked help site PR Ready for review

@lanitochka17

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #100756 was identified to be related to this PR.

@mitarachim

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #100772 was identified to be related to this PR.

@jponikarchuk

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #100790 was identified to be related to this PR.

@lanitochka17

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #100878 was identified to be related to this PR.

@lanitochka17

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Deploy Blocker #100879 was identified to be related to this PR

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.75-3 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

@OSBotify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.4.75-3 🚀

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

Bundle Size Analysis (Sentry):

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants