BT - Migrate SAGE_INTACCT Export

[mananjadhav]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #83845
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Preconditions

• A workspace is connected to Sage Intacct.
• You are a workspace admin (or have access to Accounting export settings).
• For each test, remove the backTo query param from the URL (if present) before starting.

Case 1 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_EXPORT
(regression test)

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export (Sage Intacct export configuration).
4. Confirm the Export screen loads.
5. Press Back.
6. Confirm you return to the previous Accounting screen (e.g. connection / accounting hub), as expected for your navigation entry point.

Case 2 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_PREFERRED_EXPORTER

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export.
4. Open Preferred exporter.
5. Confirm the preferred exporter screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Sage Intacct Export.

Case 3 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_EXPORT_DATE

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export.
4. Open Export date.
5. Confirm the export date screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Sage Intacct Export.

Case 4 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export.
4. Open Reimbursable expenses.
5. Confirm the reimbursable expenses screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Sage Intacct Export.

Case 5 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_REIMBURSABLE_DESTINATION

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export → Reimbursable expenses.
4. Open Destination.
5. Confirm the reimbursable destination screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Reimbursable expenses.

Case 6 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_NON_REIMBURSABLE_EXPENSES

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export.
4. Open Non-reimbursable expenses.
5. Confirm the non-reimbursable expenses screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Sage Intacct Export.

Case 7 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_NON_REIMBURSABLE_DESTINATION

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export → Non-reimbursable expenses.
4. Open Destination.
5. Confirm the non-reimbursable destination screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Non-reimbursable expenses.

Case 8 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_DEFAULT_VENDOR

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export → Reimbursable expenses.
4. Open Default vendor.
5. Confirm the default vendor screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Reimbursable expenses.
8. Repeat steps 3–7 from Non-reimbursable expenses and confirm back navigation returns there.

Case 9 : POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_NON_REIMBURSABLE_CREDIT_CARD_ACCOUNT

1. Open Expensify.
2. Open the Sage Intacct–connected workspace.
3. Go to Accounting → Export → Non-reimbursable expenses.
4. Open Credit card account.
5. Confirm the credit card account screen loads.
6. Press Back.
7. Confirm you return to Non-reimbursable expenses.

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

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

• 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
    • 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

mweb-chrome-sage-intacct-export-1.mov

iOS: Native

ios-sage-intacct-export-1.mov

iOS: mWeb Safari

mweb-safari-sage-intacct-export-1.mov

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

web-sage-intacct-export-1.mov

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/ROUTES.ts	16.25% <ø> (+0.16%)	⬆️
src/SCREENS.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...gation/linkingConfig/RELATIONS/WORKSPACE_TO_RHP.ts	100.00% <ø> (ø)
src/libs/Navigation/linkingConfig/config.ts	76.92% <ø> (ø)
...eIntacctNonReimbursableExpensesDestinationPage.tsx	0.00% <ø> (ø)
...ntacct/export/DynamicSageIntacctExportDatePage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
.../DynamicSageIntacctNonReimbursableExpensesPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...export/DynamicSageIntacctPreferredExporterPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...SageIntacctReimbursableExpensesDestinationPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...ort/DynamicSageIntacctReimbursableExpensesPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 2 more
... and 43 files with indirect coverage changes

[melvin-bot]

@huult 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]

[mananjadhav]

Issues with my Android emulator. @huult Can you review and help with the QA for Android Native?

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 992d36105b

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Keep legacy Sage preferred-exporter route reachable

Changing this suffix from preferred-exporter to sage-preferred-exporter breaks previously issued Sage Intacct export URLs (for example browser history, shared links, or stale backTo links) because the old static Sage route was removed in this commit and there is no compatibility remap in OldRoutes. Users opening the old URL will no longer land on the intended screen, so we should keep an alias/redirect for the legacy path.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Keep legacy Sage destination URLs reachable

Renaming destination suffixes to nonreimbursable-expenses and reimbursable-expenses changes previously valid URLs (.../nonreimbursable/destination and .../reimbursable/destination) without a migration path, so old deep links/history entries now fail to resolve to the destination pages. This is a regression for anyone reopening existing links, and we should preserve backward compatibility with aliases or explicit redirects.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

[huult]

@mananjadhav could you review the Codex comment? Thanks!

[huult]

Suggested change

	Navigation.goBack(backPath || (policyID && ROUTES.POLICY_ACCOUNTING_SAGE_INTACCT_EXPORT.getRoute(policyID)));
	Navigation.goBack(backPath);

When we migrate this page to a dynamic route, I think backPath will always have a value, so we can remove the fallback route after it. Could you review the remaining pages that have similar patterns as well?