8000 fix: can't play video on a narrow viewport size on IOU report by daledah · Pull Request #81962 · Expensify/App · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

fix: can't play video on a narrow viewport size on IOU report#81962

Merged
srikarparsi merged 7 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
daledah:fix/80421-1
Mar 10, 2026
Merged

fix: can't play video on a narrow viewport size on IOU report#81962
srikarparsi merged 7 commits intoExpensify:mainfrom
daledah:fix/80421-1

Conversation

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor
@daledah daledah commented Feb 10, 2026

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #80421
PROPOSAL: #80421 (comment)

Tests

  1. Navigate to a DM 1:1
  2. Create an IOU expense
  3. Click on the expense details
  4. Drag and drop a video file as an attachment
  5. Resize the page to the narrow viewport size
  6. Click on the Play or Mute button
  7. Verify that: Can play or mute the video
  • Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

Same as tests

QA Steps

// TODO: These must be filled out, or the issue title must include "[No QA]."
Same as tests

  • 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 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
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-02-10.at.17.49.40.mov

@daledah daledah marked this pull request as ready for review February 10, 2026 10:51
@daledah daledah requested review from a team as code owners February 10, 2026 10:51
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from eh2077 and trjExpensify and removed request for a team February 10, 2026 10:51
@melvin-bot
Copy link
melvin-bot bot commented Feb 10, 2026

@eh2077 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 a team and srikarparsi and removed request for a team February 10, 2026 10:51
@melvin-bot
Copy link
melvin-bot bot commented Feb 10, 2026

@srikarparsi 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]

@daledah daledah mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2026
Open
7 tasks
trjExpensify
trjExpensify previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor
@trjExpensify trjExpensify left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

An attachment in the comments of an expense thread or iou/expense report should behave consistently, I agree. 👍

@srikarparsi
Copy link
Contributor
srikarparsi commented Feb 11, 2026

Hi @eh2077 can you please review this PR when you have a chance

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 11, 2026

Sure, will look into it today

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 11, 2026 •
edited
Loading

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 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.2026-03-10.at.9.21.31.PM.mov
Android: mWeb Chrome
Screen.Recording.2026-03-10.at.9.20.32.PM.mov
iOS: HybridApp
Screen.Recording.2026-03-10.at.9.17.37.PM.mov
iOS: mWeb Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-03-10.at.9.20.06.PM.mov
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
Screen.Recording.2026-03-10.at.9.14.44.PM.mov

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 11, 2026

Bug: can't play video after switch from a narrow screen

Screen.Recording.2026-02-11.at.5.58.38.PM.mov

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 13, 2026

@daledah friendly bump!

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Feb 13, 2026

I'll investigate and give an update soon

@codecov
Copy link
codecov bot commented Feb 15, 2026 •
edited by github-actions bot
Loading

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines Coverage Δ
...ents/VideoPlayerContexts/PlaybackContext/index.tsx 90.90% <100.00%> (+0.58%) ⬆️
src/components/VideoPlayer/BaseVideoPlayer.tsx 50.17% <78.94%> (+1.30%) ⬆️
... and 7 files with indirect coverage changes

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Feb 15, 2026
web-resize.mp4

@eh2077 i fixed, please check again

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 15, 2026

Cool! Can you also add unit tests please?

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Feb 16, 2026

Cool! Can you also add unit tests please?

We don't create any a new function. So I think we won't create unit tests here.

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 17, 2026

Cool! Can you also add unit tests please?

We don't create any a new function. So I think we won't create unit tests here.

Hmm, it might make sense in the past, but I think we should add unit test for these changes, see the below bullet point from PR author checklist.

  • I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.

See also a note from internal C+ channel

image

I agree some use cases might be not easy to add unit test, so you can share your thoughts in that case and I'll help look into it as well, thanks!

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Feb 19, 2026

please especially whenever there are changes to the Utils, Actions, hooks, always ask for unit tests that cover these changes, even if maybe that function is not covered yet at all, or the method is very simple.

In this PR, we’re not changing anything in Utils, Actions, or hooks. I also don’t see any existing tests that are related to this video flow.
At the moment, I don’t have any ideas on how to write unit tests to cover the specific case we’re fixing in this PR.

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 19, 2026

@daledah It still doesn't work well after change to small window and then back to large window

Screen.Recording.2026-02-19.at.10.33.48.PM.mov

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Feb 24, 2026
web-resize.mp4

it works well after i merge main in my side. Plesae check again

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 24, 2026

I'll retest tmr, thanks!

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Feb 25, 2026

I still can reproduce the issue. @daledah let me know if you can reproduce it with following steps, thanks!

Screen.Recording.2026-02-25.at.10.59.10.PM.mov

Precondition: add a video to expense details of a report

  1. click report preview to open expense details
  2. click the video to load it
  3. click to expand video play
  4. resize browser window to narrow window
  5. resize browser window back to large window
  6. click the play button to start or stop video but it doesn't work
  7. close the attachment modal
  8. from expense details page, click the play button to start or stop video, but it doesn't work either

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Mar 1, 2026

@eh2077 It seems the reproduce steps aren't consistent. Could you add Melvin here to help us?

@eh2077
Copy link
Contributor
eh2077 commented Mar 2, 2026

@daledah I'm not sure if Melvin could help in this case. Can you share a video following the steps? hmm, I can reproduce constantly.

@MelvinBot please help troubleshoot the issue as mentioned #81962 (comment) and #81962 (comment)

@MelvinBot
Copy link
Contributor
MelvinBot commented Mar 2, 2026

🔍 Troubleshooting Analysis: Video Controls Break After Viewport Resize (narrow → wide)

Reproduction Steps Confirmed

Following eh2077's steps:

  1. Open expense details → click video → expand to attachment modal (wide layout)
  2. Resize browser to narrow → resize back to wide
  3. Play/mute buttons become unresponsive in the moda BEA4 l AND after closing the modal

Root Cause

The shared video element system was designed for two separate BaseVideoPlayer instances (one non-shared "donor" in the chat, one shared "receiver" in the modal). It was not designed for a single instance toggling between shared and non-shared modes, which is what happens during viewport resize.

Here is the precise failure chain:

Step 1 — Mode flip during resize:
In AttachmentViewVideo/index.tsx:27, the effective prop is computed as:

shouldUseSharedVideoElement={shouldUseSharedVideoElement && !shouldUseNarrowLayout}

When the viewport crosses the 800px breakpoint (mobileResponsiveWidthBreakpoint), shouldUseNarrowLayout flips, causing shouldUseSharedVideoElement to toggle between true and false.

Step 2 — Non-shared → shared transition breaks ref registration:
When shouldUseSharedVideoElement changes from false → true (narrow → wide), the BaseVideoPlayer calls shareVideoPlayerElements in its effect at BaseVideoPlayer.tsx:362-388. However, shareVideoPlayerElements in PlaybackContext/index.tsx:81 has a guard:

if (shouldUseSharedVideoElement || url !== currentlyPlayingURL || reportID !== currentRouteReportID) {
    return; // ← Returns early! video.updateRefs() is NEVER called
}

This guard is intentional for the two-instance architecture (shared instances should receive, not donate). But after a resize, the single instance is now in shared mode with no non-shared donor to register the refs.

Step 3 — Controls silently fail:
All video control actions depend on currentVideoPlayerRef.current:

After the resize transition, currentVideoPlayerRef.current may either be stale (pointing to a player whose VideoView React component was unmounted when the JSX branch switched) or the control path is disrupted because the context was never re-registered.

Step 4 — VideoView unmount during branch switch:
When shouldUseSharedVideoElement changes from false to true, React unmounts the <VideoView> component at BaseVideoPlayer.tsx:507-517 and replaces it with an empty container <View ref={sharedVideoPlayerParentRef}>. The sharedElement DOM node is then moved into this container via DOM manipulation (line 408-413). However, expo-video's VideoView React component lifecycle cleanup may disconnect the player from its display surface when it unmounts, making the re-attached DOM node a passive element that the player no longer controls.

What the PR's Changes Do (and Don't Do)

The PR correctly addresses half of the problem:

  • ✅ Prevents destructive cleanup: Using shouldUseSharedVideoElementRef (a ref) instead of the closure value prevents the useLayoutEffect cleanup from nullifying currentVideoPlayerRef.current during the transition
  • ✅ Prevents premature URL clearing: Same ref pattern prevents setCurrentlyPlayingURL(null) during resize
  • ✅ Saves/restores playback position: savedCurrentTimeRef preserves currentTime across DOM moves
  • ❌ Does NOT re-register player refs after mode switch: After transitioning to shared mode, shareVideoPlayerElements returns early, so the context never learns about the new player state
  • ❌ Does NOT handle VideoView unmount/remount: The VideoView React component unmounts during the JSX branch switch, potentially disconnecting the expo-video player from its surface

Recommended Fix Direction

The fundamental issue is that a single BaseVideoPlayer instance shouldn't toggle between shared and non-shared modes. Two possible approaches:

Option A — Keep the VideoView alive during transitions:
Instead of using a conditional JSX branch (shouldUseSharedVideoElement ? ... : ...), always render the VideoView and use CSS/style to show/hide it. The shared element DOM movement would still work, but the React component wouldn't unmount.

Option B — Re-register refs when entering shared mode:
Modify shareVideoPlayerElements or add a separate registration path for the case where a component transitions INTO shared mode. When shouldUseSharedVideoElement changes to true, the component should still call video.updateRefs() to ensure the context has the correct player reference. This might require a new function like registerAsSharedConsumer that updates the context refs without the "non-shared donor" assumption.

Option C — Prevent mode toggling entirely:
Don't change shouldUseSharedVideoElement during viewport resize. Either always use shared or always use non-shared for a given video within the attachment modal. This is the simplest but may have UX trade-offs.

Evidence Summary

Component File Issue
shareVideoPlayerElements guard PlaybackContext/index.tsx:81 Returns early when shouldUseSharedVideoElement=true, preventing ref registration
playVideo/pauseVideo usePlaybackContextVideoRefs.ts:8-14 Silently no-op when currentVideoPlayerRef.current is null
updateVolume VolumeContext.tsx:17 Returns early when ref is null
JSX branch switch BaseVideoPlayer.tsx:480-538 Unmounts VideoView when toggling to shared mode
Mode computation AttachmentViewVideo/index.tsx:27 Toggles on viewport resize via shouldUseNarrowLayout

daledah — This analysis identifies why the bug persists after your current changes. The ref-based cleanup guards are correct and necessary, but the core issue is that the shared video element system doesn't support a single instance switching modes. Would you like to discuss which fix direction makes the most sense?

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Mar 4, 2026

thanks @eh2077, i'll check the Melvin solution today

@daledah
Copy link
Contributor Author
daledah commented Mar 4, 2026

@eh2077 i updated. This is the result:

web-resize.mp4

eh2077
eh2077 approved these changes Mar 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor
@eh2077 eh2077 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

works well!

@srikarparsi srikarparsi merged commit a75efa6 into Expensify:main Mar 10, 2026
30 checks passed
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor
github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2026

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor
OSBotify commented Mar 10, 2026

✋ 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
Copy link
Contributor
github-actions bot commented Mar 10, 2026

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #81962.

Android 🤖 iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-a75efa6-d04040c-3179a204977811bd5dc85d72a5d36011cde53166/index.html https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-a75efa6-d04040c-4cd3ca56bb0abdd91b5c29e363c06f85a5667a21/index.html
Android iOS
Web 🕸️
https://81962.pr-testing.expensify.com
Web

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

@OSBotify OSBotify mentioned this pull request Mar 11, 2026
Closed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor
OSBotify commented Mar 11, 2026

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/srikarparsi in version: 9.3.36-0 🚀

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

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor
OSBotify commented Mar 12, 2026

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/luacmartins in version: 9.3.36-10 🚀

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

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

Reviewers

@srikarparsi srikarparsi srikarparsi approved these changes

@trjExpensify trjExpensify trjExpensify left review comments

+1 more reviewer

@eh2077 eh2077 eh2077 approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@daledah daledah

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@daledah @srikarparsi @eh2077 @MelvinBot @OSBotify @trjExpensify
0