update createWorkspace API params by dukenv0307 · Pull Request #71174 · Expensify/App

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-24T09:37:14Z

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #67642
PROPOSAL: #67642 (comment)

Tests

Login with the new account
Choose Manage my team's expense
Choose 1-10 employees
Choose any accounting software
Verify that the What features are you interested in? is shown
Try to select/unselect any options
Complete the onboarding process
Verify that the CreateWorkspace is called but CreateWorkspace, UpgradeToCorporate, EnablePolicyDistanceRates , EnablePolicyExpensifyCards, SetPolicyRulesEnabled, EnablePolicyInvoicing are not

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as above

QA Steps

Same as above

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.33.41.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.27.27.mov

iOS: Native

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.32.25.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.23.02.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.20.29.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.23.30.51.mov

chiragsalian

I noticed in your PR you pass a payload like,
"categories","company-cards","workflows","invoices","accounting","rules","distance-rates","tags","expensify-card","per-diem"

Instead of that instead lets use POLICY.MORE_FEATURES keys like,

areInvoicesEnabled, ARE_PER_DIEM_RATES_ENABLED

etc, this is because the backend is aware of the latter keys while its not aware of the former keys.

chiragsalian · 2025-09-24T21:19:26Z

Also in the backend these keys are currently used.

const set<string> CreatePolicy::supportedSelectedFeatures = {
    Policy::KEY_ARE_RULES_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_TAGS_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_PER_DIEM_RATES_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_CONNECTIONS_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_EXPENSIFY_CARDS_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_INVOICES_ENABLED,
    Policy::KEY_ARE_DISTANCE_RATES_ENABLED
};

so 7 keys. i believe you are sending 3 additional ones. Let us know if its important for backend to cover the 3 additional ones you send as well or not.

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T04:10:58Z

Let us know if its important for backend to cover the 3 additional ones you send as well or not.

@chiragsalian @fedirjh I think we should keep 10 keys because we're showing 10 options. 3 of them (ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED, ARE_COMPANY_CARDS_ENABLED, ARE_WORKFLOWS_ENABLED) are enabled by default, but users can disable them

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T04:18:16Z

etc, this is because the backend is aware of the latter keys while its not aware of the former keys.

Updated!

fedirjh · 2025-09-25T08:58:12Z

I think we should keep 10 keys because we're showing 10 options. 3 of them (ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED, ARE_COMPANY_CARDS_ENABLED, ARE_WORKFLOWS_ENABLED) are enabled by default, but users can disable them

@dukenv0307 hmmm If they are disabled, then they will be excluded from the list. If they are enabled, we don't queue any requests for those keys.

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T09:04:27Z

@fedirjh Sorry I don't get your point. Can you give me the examples when ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED is enabled and disabled?

fedirjh · 2025-09-25T09:09:25Z

@dukenv0307 I misread your comment. We should display all the options, but only we need to send these keys if they are enabled.

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T09:15:21Z

@fedirjh Yeah, but based on this comment, we just defined 7 keys on BE, but we have 10 keys on FE.

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T09:16:01Z

3 additional keys mentioned here are: ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED, ARE_COMPANY_CARDS_ENABLED, ARE_WORKFLOWS_ENABLED

fedirjh · 2025-09-25T09:19:30Z

Yeah, but based on #71174 (comment), we just defined 7 keys on BE, but we have 10 keys on FE.

3 additional keys mentioned #71174 (comment) are: ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED, ARE_COMPANY_CARDS_ENABLED, ARE_WORKFLOWS_ENABLED

@dukenv0307 Why do we have to send these 3 additional keys? do we have a request queued for those keys when enabled?

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T09:23:53Z

do we have a request queued for those keys when enabled?

No, because they're enabled by default. But in case users disable them, we have to handle it on BE instead of calling APIs to disable, right?

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T09:24:02Z

@fedirjh ^

fedirjh · 2025-09-25T09:30:40Z

Oh, I see it now. Let me check the BE.

fedirjh · 2025-09-25T09:55:28Z

No, because they're enabled by default. But in case users disable them, we have to handle it on BE instead of calling APIs to disable, right?

Looking at the Web-E code, within CreateWorkspace command, they’re enabled by default. Since selectedFeatures is optional parameter, we can’t rely on it to disable features (there is no way to explicitly disable features within selectedFeatures). We could either change the format to:

features: { enabled: [], disabled: [] }

or add a separate disabledFeatures parameter.

cc @chiragsalian

dukenv0307 · 2025-09-25T10:06:18Z

If selectedFeatures is undefined, we can keep the same behavior as before (3 features are enabled by default). Otherwise, we will enable the features contained in selectedFeatures. Or we can make it required, then I can fallback it to [ARE_CATEGORIES_ENABLED, ARE_COMPANY_CARDS_ENABLED, ARE_WORKFLOWS_ENABLED] before sending API. It's just my idea, you guys can choose other solutions that are more efficient

chiragsalian · 2025-09-26T17:37:31Z

No, because they're enabled by default. But in case users disable them, we have to handle it on BE instead of calling APIs to disable, right?

Nice find. I totally didn't check or think of those first 3.

I had to think over this for a bit, i think both posted options has some cons,

features: { enabled: [], disabled: [] }

I feel like this can get confusing to read. Like for the 3 default ones do we always pass them in as enabled if they are. And everything thats not enabled we pass into disabled. If so such that enabled + disabled always contains 10 keys thats fine with me. The only con is data structure and readability to me.

"If selectedFeatures is undefined, we can keep the same behavior as before"

Having logic on undefined is not ideal since it makes code hard to follow. For example, if a user creates a workspace normally selectedFeatures is undefined. Now if a user during onboarding deselects all options then selectedFeatures is also undefined. But during onboarding the backend would need to disable these.

Alright with that said, im opting for option 3, i.e., when in doubt do what the database does i.e.,
We pass selectedFeatures as a simple JSON so,

{
    "areCategoriesEnabled": true,
    "areCompanyCardsEnabled": true,
    "areConnectionsEnabled": false,
    "areDistanceRatesEnabled": false,
    "areExpensifyCardsEnabled": false,
    "areInvoicesEnabled": false,
    "arePerDiemRatesEnabled": false,
    "areReportFieldsEnabled": false,
    "areRulesEnabled": false,
    "areTagsEnabled": false,
    "areWorkflowsEnabled": false
}

(it looks like the backend saves one extra than what the front end shows so feel free to ignore whichever is extra)
I feel like this is verbose and makes it immediately obvious whats enabled and whats not. If selectedFeatures is undefined we know we're not in the onboarding flow and then the backend can do its default behavior.

What do you guys think?

fedirjh · 2025-09-30T15:51:56Z

@chiragsalian I agree with the proposed Option 3, that'd make it much clear and explicit, and am ready to start the Auth PR. 👍

chiragsalian · 2025-09-30T19:52:55Z

awesome sounds good, let me know when those PRs are ready. Let us know your thoughts too @dukenv0307 when you get a chance.

dukenv0307 · 2025-10-02T02:18:43Z

Option 3 looks good

dukenv0307 · 2025-10-02T02:19:29Z

I'll update the PR soon

codecov · 2025-10-02T14:36:10Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 33.33333% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...estedFeatures/BaseOnboardingInterestedFeatures.tsx	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts	60.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/CONST/index.ts	`85.71% <ø> (-0.14%)`	⬇️
...c/pages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepUpgrade.tsx	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts	`32.40% <60.00%> (+0.65%)`	⬆️
...estedFeatures/BaseOnboardingInterestedFeatures.tsx	`1.04% <0.00%> (+0.02%)`	⬆️

... and 54 files with indirect coverage changes

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

melvin-bot · 2025-10-08T07:58:04Z

@thesahindia 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]

chiragsalian · 2025-10-08T22:49:09Z

Nice, this direction looks better to me, while testing it works good too. Let's remember to keep this PR on HOLD though and it should be merged after the web-e and auth PRs are live.

chiragsalian · 2025-10-09T18:00:23Z

Neat, we got the backend PRs merged. They should go live by Monday/Tuesday.
@thesahindia, friendly bump to review this PR when you get a chance.
@dukenv0307, you've got a conflict to address.

thesahindia · 2025-10-10T12:31:19Z

Will get to it today.

thesahindia · 2025-10-13T11:31:39Z

They should go live by Monday/Tuesday.

Are the changes live now?

fedirjh · 2025-10-13T12:13:58Z

Are the changes live now?

It's on staging now. I guess you can test it with selecting staging server from newDot.

chiragsalian · 2025-10-13T18:14:30Z

Both the backend PRs are live now.

thesahindia · 2025-10-14T11:07:48Z

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
- MacOS: Desktop
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 there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
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.2025-10-14.at.9.23.30.PM.mov

Android: mWeb Chrome

Screen.Recording.2025-10-15.at.12.55.10.AM.mov

iOS: HybridApp

Screen.Recording.2025-10-15.at.6.00.14.PM.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-10-15.at.6.02.38.PM.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

Screen.Recording.2025-10-14.at.1.38.00.PM.mov

MacOS: Desktop

Screen.Recording.2025-10-15.at.6.06.20.PM.mov

thesahindia · 2025-10-14T11:08:20Z

@dukenv0307, please add the videos and merge main.

dukenv0307 · 2025-10-14T16:35:38Z

@thesahindia Done

thesahindia

LGTM!

chiragsalian

LGTM

chiragsalian · 2025-10-16T20:48:40Z

Thank you for the changes 🙂

OSBotify · 2025-10-16T20:59:54Z

✋ 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 · 2025-10-16T23:41:33Z

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/chiragsalian in version: 9.2.33-0 🚀

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

Julesssss · 2025-10-17T22:30:04Z

Reverting to resolve this blocker

OSBotify · 2025-10-20T09:25:21Z

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/mountiny in version: 9.2.33-4 🚀

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

update createWorkspace API params

ad503fc

melvin-bot Bot assigned dukenv0307 Sep 24, 2025

dukenv0307 mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2025

[C+ Checklist Needs Completion] [$250] Improve ex50 onboarding flow #67642

Closed

chiragsalian reviewed Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

Comment thread src/libs/actions/Policy/Policy.ts Outdated

chiragsalian requested changes Sep 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

update interested feature key

11efeb5

dukenv0307 mentioned this pull request Sep 25, 2025

[Due for payment 2026-01-09] [Due for payment 2025-12-30] [$500] Add Travel Enablement Flow to NewDot Workspace "More Features" #70187

Closed

16 tasks

dukenv0307 added 3 commits October 2, 2025 21:24

update selectedFeatures

be8dd0b

Merge branch 'main' into fix/67642

6104539

Merge branch 'main' into fix/67642

c2f7fc8

remove areDistanceRatesEnabled

493bc2e

dukenv0307 marked this pull request as ready for review October 8, 2025 07:57

dukenv0307 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 8, 2025 07:57

melvin-bot Bot requested review from thesahindia and removed request for a team October 8, 2025 07:58

fix conflicts

c4fab95

thesahindia approved these changes Oct 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot Bot requested a review from chiragsalian October 15, 2025 16:41

chiragsalian approved these changes Oct 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

chiragsalian merged commit c758645 into Expensify:main Oct 16, 2025
22 checks passed

OSBotify mentioned this pull request Oct 16, 2025

Deploy Checklist: New Expensify 2025-10-16 #72816

Closed

67 tasks

This was referenced Oct 17, 2025

Onboarding- Collect workspace is created when select QBD on onboarding modal #72867

Closed

Revert "update createWorkspace API params" #72896

Merged

Julesssss mentioned this pull request Oct 17, 2025

Revert "update createWorkspace API params" #72902

Closed

yusufdeveloper2903 mentioned this pull request May 27, 2026

[$250] Emails-Two "Your free trial has started" emails sent to the user after onboarding #91783

Closed

7 tasks

Conversation

dukenv0307 commented Sep 24, 2025 • 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!

Uh oh!

chiragsalian left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Sep 26, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Sep 30, 2025

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Sep 30, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Oct 2, 2025

Uh oh!

dukenv0307 commented Oct 2, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov Bot commented Oct 2, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

melvin-bot Bot commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Oct 9, 2025

Uh oh!

thesahindia commented Oct 10, 2025

Uh oh!

thesahindia commented Oct 13, 2025

Uh oh!

fedirjh commented Oct 13, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

chiragsalian commented Oct 13, 2025

Uh oh!

thesahindia commented Oct 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

thesahindia commented Oct 14, 2025

dukenv0307 commented Sep 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

dukenv0307 commented Sep 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov Bot commented Oct 2, 2025 •

edited

Loading

fedirjh commented Oct 13, 2025 •

edited

Loading

thesahindia commented Oct 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading