[Due for payment 2025-03-17] [$250] When going to workspace list from Subscription, back button returns to Account settings

[IuliiaHerets]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.99-0
Reproducible in staging?: Yes
Reproducible in production?: Yes
If this was caught on HybridApp, is this reproducible on New Expensify Standalone?: Yes, reproducible on both
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: Exp #56840
Email or phone of affected tester (no customers): [email protected]
Issue reported by: Applause Internal Team
Device used: iPhone 15 Pro Max / iOS 18.3
App Component: User Settings

Action Performed:

Precondition:

• User has at least two Collect workspaces.

1. Launch ND or hybrid app.
2. Go to Account settings > Subscription.
3. Tap Control.
4. Tap Go to workspaces.
5. Tap app back button.

Expected Result:

App will return to the previous page which is the subscription page.

Actual Result:

App returns to Account settings.

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

• Android: Standalone
• Android: HybridApp
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Standalone
• iOS: HybridApp
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Bug6746467_1739867988626.ScreenRecording_02-18-2025_16-34-52_1.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021891960074172485749
• Upwork Job ID: 1891960074172485749
• Last Price Increase: 2025-02-18
• Automatic offers:
• daledah | Contributor | 106209369

Issue Owner

Current Issue Owner: @isabelastisser

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @isabelastisser (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.

[daledah]

🚨 Edited by proposal-police: This proposal was edited at 2025-02-18 09:07:28 UTC.

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

App returns to Account settings.

What is the root cause of that problem?

We are using navigate with forceReplace: true here

App/src/pages/workspace/upgrade/GenericFeaturesView.tsx

Lines 95 to 100 in b504588

	<Button
	text={translate('workspace.common.goToWorkspaces')}
	success
	onPress={() => Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.SETTINGS_WORKSPACES, {forceReplace: true})}
	large
	/>

And using goBack when user clicks back button

App/src/pages/workspace/WorkspacesListPage.tsx

Line 445 in b504588

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

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

1. We should add new variable backTo for route SETTINGS_WORKSPACES

2. And add backTo as Navigation.getActiveRoute() or subscription route in here

App/src/pages/workspace/upgrade/GenericFeaturesView.tsx

Line 98 in b504588

onPress={() => Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.SETTINGS_WORKSPACES, {forceReplace: true})}

3. Update function when we click the back button, if we have routes.params.backTo then we will navigate to backTo instead of ROUTES.SETTINGS

App/src/pages/workspace/WorkspacesListPage.tsx

Line 445 in b504588

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

What specific scenarios should we cover in automated tests to prevent reintroducing this issue in the future?

None

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

Reminder: Please use plain English, be brief and avoid jargon. Feel free to use images, charts or pseudo-code if necessary. Do not post large multi-line diffs or write walls of text. Do not create PRs unless you have been hired for this job.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~021891960074172485749

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @Ollyws (External)

[Ollyws]

@daledah's proposal LGTM.
🎀👀🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @tgolen, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @daledah 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[daledah]

@Ollyws PR is ready.

[melvin-bot]

⚠️ Looks like this issue was linked to a Deploy Blocker here

If you are the assigned CME please investigate whether the linked PR caused a regression and leave a comment with the results.

If a regression has occurred and you are the assigned CM follow the instructions here.

If this regression could have been avoided please consider also proposing a recommendation to the PR checklist so that we can avoid it in the future.

[melvin-bot]

Reviewing label has been removed, please complete the "BugZero Checklist".

[melvin-bot]

The solution for this issue has been 🚀 deployed to production 🚀 in version 9.1.10-6 and is now subject to a 7-day regression period 📆. Here is the list of pull requests that resolve this issue:

• fix: correct back button in workspace list page #57237

If no regressions arise, payment will be issued on 2025-03-17. 🎊

For reference, here are some details about the assignees on this issue:

• @Ollyws requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests
• @daledah requires payment automatic offer (Contributor)

[melvin-bot]

@Ollyws @isabelastisser @Ollyws The PR fixing this issue has been merged! The following checklist (instructions) will need to be completed before the issue can be closed. Please copy/paste the BugZero Checklist from here into a new comment on this GH and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

[isabelastisser]

BugZero Checklist:

• ** @Ollyws ** Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production (eg. bug slipped through the normal regression and PR testing process on staging)
• 2b. Reported on staging (eg. found during regression or PR testing)
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• ** @Ollyws ** The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

  Link to comment:

• ** @Ollyws ** If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

  Link to discussion:

• ** @Ollyws ** If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

Regression Test Proposal Template

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[isabelastisser]

Payment summary:

@Ollyws requires payment through NewDot Manual Requests $250 for C+ review
@daledah requires payment automatic offer (Contributor) Paid in Upwork.

[isabelastisser]

@Ollyws, please complete the checklist before payment is issued. Thanks!

[Ollyws]

BugZero Checklist:

• [Contributor] Classify the bug:

Bug classification

Source of bug:

• 1a. Result of the original design (eg. a case wasn't considered)
• 1b. Mistake during implementation
• 1c. Backend bug
• 1z. Other:

Where bug was reported:

• 2a. Reported on production
• 2b. Reported on staging (deploy blocker)
• 2c. Reported on both staging and production
• 2d. Reported on a PR
• 2z. Other:

Who reported the bug:

• 3a. Expensify user
• 3b. Expensify employee
• 3c. Contributor
• 3d. QA
• 3z. Other:

• [Contributor] The offending PR has been commented on, pointing out the bug it caused and why, so the author and reviewers can learn from the mistake.

  Link to comment: https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/54771/files#r1999743274

• [Contributor] If the regression was CRITICAL (e.g. interrupts a core flow) A discussion in #expensify-open-source has been started about whether any other steps should be taken (e.g. updating the PR review checklist) in order to catch this type of bug sooner.

  Link to discussion:

• [Contributor] If it was decided to create a regression test for the bug, please propose the regression test steps using the template below to ensure the same bug will not reach production again.

Regression Test Proposal Template

• [BugZero Assignee] Create a GH issue for creating/updating the regression test once above steps have been agreed upon.

  Link to issue:

Regression Test Proposal

Precondition:

Test:

1. Create 2 Workspaces
2. Go to settings -> Subscription
3. Click on Control plan
4. Click Go to workspace
5. Click back button
6. Verify that: User is navigated back to Subscription page

Do we agree 👍 or 👎

[Ollyws]

Requested in ND.

[isabelastisser]

All set!

[garrettmknight]

$250 approved for @Ollyws