[Payment due @FitseTLT] MergeTransaction: guard against requesting merge candidates with an empty transactionID by puneetlath · Pull Request #96194 · Expensify/App

puneetlath · 2026-07-15T15:38:11Z

Explanation of Change

getTransactionsForMerging in src/libs/actions/MergeTransaction.ts reads targetTransaction.transactionID and then either computes eligible transactions locally or calls the GetTransactionsForMerging API — without checking that the transactionID is non-empty. When transactionID is blank, this fires the API with an empty transactionID (which the backend rejects with a 401, logged as a [OOPS!] server error) and would also write to a malformed mergeTransaction_ Onyx key.

This adds an early return when transactionID is empty, so neither the local path nor the API call runs with a blank ID. This is the client-side complement to the Auth-side graceful-degrade change for #616428.

Fixed Issues

For https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/616428
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Set up a Collect/Control workspace with a submitter and an approver.
As the submitter, create two expenses on a report
Open the merge flow on one of the expenses.
Verify the eligible merge candidates load as before (no regression) and no errors appear in the JS console.

The empty-transactionID guard itself is covered by an automated unit test in tests/actions/MergeTransactionTest.ts (getTransactionsForMerging → "should do nothing when the target transaction has no transactionID"), since a blank transactionID is not reliably reproducible through the UI.

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Go offline.
Open the merge flow on a valid transaction and verify eligible candidates are still computed locally as before.

QA Steps

Set up a Collect/Control workspace with a submitter and an approver.
As the submitter, create two expenses on a report
Open the merge flow on one of the expenses.
Verify the eligible merge candidates load as before (no regression) and no errors appear in the JS console.

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

…mpty transactionID getTransactionsForMerging could fire GetTransactionsForMerging (or write a malformed MERGE_TRANSACTION Onyx key) when targetTransaction.transactionID was blank, producing backend auth errors. Return early when the transactionID is empty.

…rMerging Add a test asserting no merge-candidate Onyx entry is written when the target transaction has an empty transactionID.

melvin-bot · 2026-07-15T15:38:45Z

@stitesExpensify 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]

…ions-empty-id-guard

FitseTLT · 2026-07-16T14:00:42Z

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 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)
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)
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.
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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

FitseTLT · 2026-07-16T14:01:58Z

@puneetlath On the test steps, I don't think Merge is related with having duplicate expenses.

puneetlath · 2026-07-16T14:18:24Z

@FitseTLT when you go through the duplicates flow and choose to keep one, you are merging the transactions together.

FitseTLT · 2026-07-16T14:24:38Z

Nope @puneetlath the function you changed doesn't get called in this flow it is called when you click merge on a transaction when it fetches the eligible merge transactions list

puneetlath · 2026-07-16T14:40:05Z

Got it! I'll adjust the steps.

puneetlath · 2026-07-16T14:40:28Z

Everything else good from your perspective @FitseTLT?

FitseTLT · 2026-07-16T14:41:36Z

Yep

melvin-bot · 2026-07-16T14:42:18Z

@inimaga 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 · 2026-07-16T14:42:20Z

🎯 @FitseTLT, thanks for reviewing and testing this PR! 🎉

A payment issue will be created for your review once this PR is deployed to production.
E/E issue linked to the PR - no internal issue.

If payment is not needed (e.g., regression PR review fix etc), react with 👎 to this comment to prevent the payment issue from being created.

OSBotify · 2026-07-16T14:52:40Z

✋ 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 · 2026-07-16T15:01:36Z

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

github-actions · 2026-07-16T15:07:10Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #96194.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-15c29d3bab8-84c49dd-5a021d4fe9ae75735fc026dfacf05fe588cf13ca/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-15c29d3-84c49dd-f065827895cb9a08ccfa6514c3f5a916c67a361d/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://96194.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

OSBotify · 2026-07-16T23:50:51Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/puneetlath in version: 9.4.36-0 🚀

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

MelvinBot · 2026-07-16T23:53:00Z

🤖 No help site changes required.

I reviewed the changes in this PR against the help site articles under docs/articles. This is a purely internal, defensive bug fix — it adds an early return in getTransactionsForMerging when transactionID is empty, preventing a doomed API call and a malformed Onyx write. It does not change any user-facing feature, UI, button label, tab, or documented workflow.

The relevant help article, How-to-Merge-Expenses.md, documents the merge-expenses flow, and the behavior it describes is unchanged by this PR. No draft docs PR was created.

If you believe a documentation update is warranted here, let me know and I'll draft one.

puneetlath added 2 commits July 15, 2026 11:36

MergeTransaction: test empty-transactionID guard in getTransactionsFo…

c34aa80

…rMerging Add a test asserting no merge-candidate Onyx entry is written when the target transaction has an empty transactionID.

puneetlath requested review from a team as code owners July 15, 2026 15:38

melvin-bot Bot assigned puneetlath Jul 15, 2026

melvin-bot Bot requested review from flaviadefaria and stitesExpensify and removed request for a team July 15, 2026 15:38

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into puneet-merge-transact…

8267465

…ions-empty-id-guard

puneetlath requested a review from FitseTLT July 15, 2026 18:34

stitesExpensify approved these changes Jul 15, 2026

View reviewed changes

FitseTLT approved these changes Jul 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from inimaga July 16, 2026 14:42

melvin-bot Bot changed the title ~~MergeTransaction: guard against requesting merge candidates with an empty transactionID~~ [Payment due @FitseTLT] MergeTransaction: guard against requesting merge candidates with an empty transactionID Jul 16, 2026

puneetlath merged commit 15c29d3 into main Jul 16, 2026
47 checks passed

puneetlath deleted the puneet-merge-transactions-empty-id-guard branch July 16, 2026 14:43

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Jul 16, 2026

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2026-07-16 #96356

Open

46 tasks

Uh oh!

Conversation

puneetlath commented Jul 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!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 15, 2026

Uh oh!

FitseTLT commented Jul 16, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

FitseTLT commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

FitseTLT commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

puneetlath commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

FitseTLT commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

OSBotify commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Jul 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

puneetlath commented Jul 15, 2026 •

edited

Loading

FitseTLT commented Jul 16, 2026 •

edited

Loading