Fix split expense page is not found when editing a split expense with policy workflow disabled

[tsa321]

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

$ #77179
PROPOSAL: #77179 (comment)

Tests

Precondition: Workspace workflow is disabled.

1. Open a workspace chat.
2. Create an expense.
3. Open the expense report.
4. Click More > Retract.
5. Click More > Split.
6. Click Save.
7. Click Submit.
8. Open any split.
9. Click the Amount field.
10. Verify that the Split Expense page is displayed correctly.
11. Click on one of the split items.
12. Verify that the Edit Split Expense page is displayed correctly.

• 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]."

Precondition: Workspace workflow is disabled.

1. Open a workspace chat.
2. Create an expense.
3. Open the expense report.
4. Click More > Retract.
5. Click More > Split.
6. Click Save.
7. Click Submit.
8. Open any split.
9. Click the Amount field.
10. Verify that the Split Expense page is displayed correctly.
11. Click on one of the split items.
12. Verify that the Edit Split Expense page is displayed correctly.

• 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_native_d.mp4

Android: mWeb Chrome

android_mweb_d.mp4

iOS: Native

ios_native_d.mp4

iOS: mWeb Safari

ios_msafari_d.mp4

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

macos_web_d.mp4

[melvin-bot]

@alitoshmatov 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]

[codecov]

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...c/components/ReportActionItem/MoneyRequestView.tsx	0.42% <0.00%> (ø)
src/pages/iou/SplitExpenseEditPage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/pages/iou/SplitExpensePage.tsx	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 58 files with indirect coverage changes

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9f7303d45d

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".

[tsa321]

To show edit split page, I am reverting this change from #77911 because the expected behavior should follow this: #75472 (comment)

[tsa321]

Bugs on main:

1. When refreshing the split expense page or the edit expense page, the page briefly shows Not Found. This is fixed in fix: Not here page appears briefly in Split RHP #79117, but the fix is currently applied only to the split expense page.

Video:

refresh.mp4

2. When the report status is Done, if an admin adds a split expense on the split expense page, a backend error occurs when submitting it. Additionally, the split edit page shows Not Found for the newly added split.

Video:

adding_split_done.mp4

3. The split expense page restricts the total split amount from exceeding the original amount. When the workspace workflow is disabled, there is no way for an admin to make the total split higher than the original amount.

[tsa321]

I am using canEditFieldOfMoneyRequest because I think it is the proper way to check whether a user can edit a money request, and it is also used in MoneyRequestView.

isSplitAction is in ReportSecondaryActionUtils.ts and is used to determine whether the Split action menu (secondary actions / More menu, etc.) is available for a transaction. I think modifying it to check whether a user can edit a split expense would be incorrect and could affect the secondary action menu behavior.

[tsa321]

@alitoshmatov PR is ready

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 813fd6018f

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]

Preserve per-item editability when editing splits

When isEditingSplitExpense is true, every split item’s isEditable is forced to the single canEditSplitExpense value, which ignores each item’s own statusNum (derived from its report in initSplitExpenseItemData). In a mixed-status split (e.g., one item approved/settled while another remains open), this makes all items editable or non‑editable together, so closed items can be opened for edit or open items get blocked. Consider combining canEditSplitExpense with the per‑item statusNum (or computing permissions per item) so editability reflects each split’s report state.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.