Revert #89360 (bulk merge navigation) to unblock deploy

[MelvinBot]

Explanation of Change

This reverts PR #89360 ("Fix bulk expense merge opening self DM instead of transaction thread"), which is a DeployBlockerCash on the current staging deploy.

That PR changed the post-merge navigation target to the target transaction's thread report instead of the destination chat report. Offline, that thread report has no CREATED report action loaded, so the offline-only skeleton condition in ReportActionsList.tsx (isOffline && !some(action === CREATED)) stays true forever, leaving the RHP stuck on an infinite loading skeleton after merging a Self DM expense with a workspace expense while offline.

Reverting restores the pre-PR navigation behavior (navigating to the destination chat report, which already has its CREATED action in Onyx), unblocking the deploy. The original fix can be re-landed with the offline edge case handled.

This is a clean revert of merge commit e07b8f42a1c4d2db5960827786baea87ba4d4390 (git revert -m 1); 15 files changed, matching the original PR's footprint.

Fixed Issues

$ #92846

PROPOSAL:

Tests

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review"
// Please describe what tests you performed that validates your changed worked.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

// TODO: The human co-author must fill out the QA tests you ran before marking this PR as "ready for review".
// Please describe what QA needs to do to validate your changes and what areas do they need to test for regressions.

• 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
• 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 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
  • 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Looks like you've decreased code coverage for some files. Please write tests to increase, or at least maintain, the existing level of code coverage. See our documentation here for how to interpret this table.

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
.../MoneyRequestReportView/SelectionToolbar/index.tsx	76.59% <ø> (-0.49%)	⬇️
src/hooks/useSelectedTransactionsActions.ts	76.44% <100.00%> (-1.55%)	⬇️
src/libs/MergeTransactionUtils.ts	75.96% <ø> (-3.64%)	⬇️
.../components/MoneyRequestHeaderSecondaryActions.tsx	0.53% <0.00%> (ø)
src/hooks/useSearchBulkActions.ts	46.68% <0.00%> (+1.38%)	⬆️
src/pages/TransactionMerge/ConfirmationPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
.../TransactionMerge/MergeTransactionsListContent.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ges/TransactionMerge/MergeTransactionsListPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/libs/actions/MergeTransaction.ts	67.89% <0.00%> (-11.81%)	⬇️
... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

[MelvinBot]

Fixed the failing check.

Root cause: The PR Author Checklist / checklist check wasn't failing for the usual "unchecked boxes" reason — it was crashing with TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'split'). The action parses the PR body by splitting on the ### PR Author Checklist and ### Screenshots/Videos markers (authorChecklist.ts:48-50), but the original PR body was generated without those template sections, so the split returned undefined.

Fix: Restored the standard PR template structure (added the ### PR Author Checklist and ### Screenshots/Videos sections, renamed ### QA → ### QA Steps) while preserving the original explanation. This was a PR-description edit only — no code changes.

The checklist now parses correctly and reports the normal "0 of 49 items completed" state. NicolasBonet — please complete the author checklist and fill in the Tests/QA sections before marking this PR ready for review. All other checks (tests, typecheck, builds, lint) are passing.

[MelvinBot]

All checks are now passing ✅ — including checklist, typecheck, all 8 test jobs, builds, perf tests, and lint. There are no failing checks left to fix.

The earlier checklist crash was resolved by restoring the PR template structure in the description.

[MelvinBot]

All checks are now passing ✅ — no failing checks remain.

The earlier checklist failure was resolved by my previous fix (the PR body was missing the ### PR Author Checklist / ### Screenshots/Videos template sections, which crashed the parser). With the template restored and the author checklist now completed, all checks are green: tests (jobs 1–8), typecheck, builds, lint, perf tests, and checklist all pass.