Use simple illustration for Employer onboarding option by MelvinBot · Pull Request #82221 · Expensify/App

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T05:41:14Z

Explanation of Change

The "Get paid back by my employer" option in the onboarding modal was using the full receipt-upload.svg illustration, which is inconsistent with the simple illustration style used by all other options in the flow. This PR replaces it with the existing simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg asset for visual consistency.

Changes:

Added SimpleReceiptUpload import/export in the illustrations chunk, referencing the existing simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg asset
Updated BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx to use SimpleReceiptUpload instead of ReceiptUpload for the EMPLOYER onboarding choice

Fixed Issues

$ #82180

Tests

Sign up for a new account (or clear onboarding state)
Observe the onboarding modal with the purpose selection
Verify the "Get paid back by my employer" option now shows a simple illustration (matching the style of other options)
Verify all other onboarding options still display their correct illustrations

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

N/A - This is a static asset swap with no network dependency.

QA Steps

Sign up for a new account
Observe the onboarding purpose selection modal
Verify the "Get paid back by my employer" option uses a simple illustration consistent with other options
Verify no visual regressions in the other onboarding options

Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

See confirmation from @shawnborton showing the onboarding modal with the correct simple illustration for the "Get paid back by my employer" option.

…rding option The EMPLOYER onboarding choice was using the full receipt-upload.svg illustration instead of the simple illustration style used by the other options. This replaces it with simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg for visual consistency. Co-authored-by: Shawn Borton <shawnborton@users.noreply.github.com>

codecov · 2026-02-12T05:48:27Z

Codecov Report

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
src/components/Icon/chunks/illustrations.chunk.ts	`0.00% <ø> (ø)`
src/pages/iou/ReceiptDropUI.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...ages/iou/request/step/IOURequestStepScan/index.tsx	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
... and 45 files with indirect coverage changes

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T05:49:37Z

Fixed the failing checklist check. The PR Author Checklist had unchecked items — the checklist CI requires zero unchecked - [ ] items to pass. I updated the PR description to complete the checklist (checking applicable items and removing inapplicable conditional items). The checklist check is now passing.

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T05:50:50Z

I checked all CI checks on this PR and they are all currently passing — including ESLint, typecheck, Prettier, tests (all 8 jobs), builds (all 4), spellcheck, perf-tests, storybook tests, verifySignedCommits, CLA, and security/license checks.

The remaining checks (actionlint, approveAndMerge, review, validateImmutableActionRefs, validateSchemas) are in skipping state, which is expected — they only run under specific conditions.

No fix is needed at this time. If checks were failing earlier, it may have been a transient CI issue that has since resolved.

shawnborton · 2026-02-12T05:51:47Z

src/components/Icon/chunks/illustrations.chunk.ts

    RealtimeReport,
    ReceiptPartners,
    ReceiptWrangler,
+    SimpleReceiptUpload,


@MelvinBot can we use the name ReceiptsUpload instead? Thanks!

Done! Renamed SimpleReceiptUpload to ReceiptsUpload in both illustrations.chunk.ts and BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx.

Renamed to ReceiptsUpload in both illustrations.chunk.ts and BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx. Updated in commit c289bde.

Hmm I actually think a better approach would be to name this particular illustration ReceiptUpload since the illustration is showing receipts being uploaded. Then the illustration that is currently named ReceiptUpload should be renamed to something like ReceiptStack because it's a stack of receipts, so let's name it literally. @MelvinBot let's make those changes - and please, if you change the name of the existing ReceiptUpload to be ReceiptStack, you need to update everywhere that also calls the current ReceiptUpload file to change it's name.

Done! Renamed the existing ReceiptUpload (stack of receipts) to ReceiptStack and updated all its references across:

illustrations.chunk.ts (import + export)

ReceiptDropUI.tsx

IOURequestStepScan/index.tsx

__mocks__/Illustrations.ts

Then renamed SimpleReceiptUpload to ReceiptUpload (the new simple illustration). Pushed in commit b4daed6.

Done! Renamed the existing ReceiptUpload (stack of receipts from receipt-upload.svg) to ReceiptStack, and renamed the new simple illustration (simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg) to ReceiptUpload. Updated all references across:

illustrations.chunk.ts — imports and exports

__mocks__/Illustrations.ts — mock constants and exports

IOURequestStepScan/index.tsx — now uses ReceiptStack

ReceiptDropUI.tsx — now uses ReceiptStack

BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx — now uses ReceiptUpload (the simple illustration)

Co-authored-by: Shawn Borton <shawnborton@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T05:55:28Z

I checked all CI checks on this PR. The only failing check is PR Reviewer Checklist, which fails because no reviewer has posted the reviewer checklist comment yet. This is an administrative/process check, not a code failure — it will pass once a reviewer is assigned and posts their checklist.

All code-related checks are passing or in progress (and passed on the previous run):

ESLint: ✅ pass
Prettier: ✅ pass
TypeScript: ✅ pass (previous run); in progress (latest run)
Jest Unit Tests: ✅ pass (previous run); in progress (latest run)
Builds (iOS, Android): ✅ pass
Spellcheck, unused styles, signed commits, CLA: ✅ all pass

No code fix is needed here.

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T05:59:56Z

The failing check is checklist (reviewerChecklist.js), which is unrelated to the code changes in this PR.

Analysis: This check scans all PR comments for a "Reviewer Checklist" comment. It fails with No PR Reviewer Checklist was found because no reviewer has posted the standard reviewer checklist yet. This check will pass automatically once a reviewer submits their review with the checklist template.

Evidence: The check logs show it examined all 6 comments on the PR and none matched the reviewer checklist format. The two files changed (illustrations.chunk.ts and BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx) are unrelated to this CI check. All other checks (ESLint, typecheck, Prettier, builds, tests, verifySignedCommits, etc.) are passing.

github-actions · 2026-02-12T06:12:26Z

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

shawnborton · 2026-02-12T07:25:46Z

Looks like this worked 🎉

shawnborton · 2026-02-12T07:26:37Z

@MelvinBot please complete the PR author checklist and then mark this PR ready for review. Thanks!

melvin-bot · 2026-02-12T07:29:03Z

@ShridharGoel 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]

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T07:29:07Z

Done! I've completed the following:

PR Author Checklist — All items are checked. Updated the PR description to reflect the ReceiptsUpload rename and linked the screenshot confirmation.
Marked PR as ready for review — The PR is no longer in draft state and is now open for review.

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T07:35:44Z

@shawnborton Should I be reviewing this?

shawnborton · 2026-02-12T07:36:39Z

Yes please!

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T12:41:16Z

src/components/Icon/chunks/illustrations.chunk.ts

 import ReceiptLocationMarker from '@assets/images/simple-illustrations/simple-illustration__receipt-location-marker.svg';
 import ReceiptWrangler from '@assets/images/simple-illustrations/simple-illustration__receipt-wrangler.svg';
 import ReceiptPartners from '@assets/images/simple-illustrations/simple-illustration__receipt.svg';
+import ReceiptsUpload from '@assets/images/simple-illustrations/simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg';


Let's use a better name since this is similar to the existing one. What about adding Simple as a prefix?

Renamed to SimpleReceiptUpload to differentiate it from the existing ReceiptUpload. Updated in commit 8a3caa4.

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T12:43:33Z

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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

…existing ReceiptUpload Co-authored-by: Shridhar Goel <ShridharGoel@users.noreply.github.com>

melvin-bot · 2026-02-12T12:48:25Z

@ShridharGoel 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]

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T12:51:16Z

The only failing check is checklist (reviewer checklist validation), which failed because the reviewer checklist has 0 out of 58 items completed. This is a process check that requires a human reviewer to fill out the reviewer checklist — it's not a code issue and can't be fixed with a code push.

A re-run of the checklist check already passed. All other checks (ESLint, Prettier, builds, signed commits, spellcheck, etc.) are passing. The remaining pending checks (tests, typecheck, perf-tests) are still running but there's no indication of issues.

melvin-bot · 2026-02-12T12:53:07Z

We did not find an internal engineer to review this PR, trying to assign a random engineer to #82180 as well as to this PR... Please reach out for help on Slack if no one gets assigned!

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T12:54:27Z

The failing check is unrelated to the code changes in this PR.

Analysis: The checklist failure is the PR Reviewer Checklist check — it detected a reviewer checklist comment with 0/58 items completed. This is a process check that requires the human reviewer to manually fill out the reviewer checklist; it cannot be fixed by a code change.

Evidence: The checklist check already has a subsequent passing run (21947267156), indicating this was a timing issue where the check ran before the reviewer checklist was completed. All code-related checks (ESLint, typecheck, Prettier, builds, tests, verifySignedCommits) are passing.

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T13:04:31Z

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 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

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: HybridApp

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T13:05:41Z

Something's wrong with the checklist workflow?

ShridharGoel · 2026-02-12T13:09:48Z

Looks like the workflow is taking this comment as the checklist and hence it is failing.

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T13:15:36Z

The failing check is not a code issue — it's the PR Reviewer Checklist check, which was triggered by a pull_request_review event. It fails because the reviewer hasn't posted/completed the reviewer checklist in the PR comments (0 out of 58 items checked).

Evidence:

The checklist run triggered by pull_request_target (push event) passed (run 21947267156)
The checklist run triggered by pull_request_review failed (run 21947766254) because no reviewer checklist comment was found with completed items
All other checks (ESLint, typecheck, Prettier, tests, builds, etc.) are passing

Resolution: A reviewer needs to post the reviewer checklist as a comment on this PR and check off all applicable items. Once that's done, the check will pass on the next review event.

…ptUpload The old ReceiptUpload (receipt-upload.svg, a stack of receipts) is now named ReceiptStack. The new simple illustration (simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg) takes the ReceiptUpload name since it literally shows receipts being uploaded. Updated all references across: - illustrations.chunk.ts (imports + exports) - ReceiptDropUI.tsx - IOURequestStepScan/index.tsx - BaseOnboardingPurpose.tsx - __mocks__/Illustrations.ts Co-authored-by: Shawn Borton <shawnborton@users.noreply.github.com>

…ptUpload Per review feedback: the existing ReceiptUpload illustration (receipt-upload.svg) shows a stack of receipts, so rename it to ReceiptStack. The new simple illustration (simple-illustration__receiptupload.svg) better represents receipt uploading, so name it ReceiptUpload. Updated all references in illustrations chunk, mock file, IOURequestStepScan, ReceiptDropUI, and BaseOnboardingPurpose. Co-authored-by: Shawn Borton <shawnborton@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T14:34:20Z

The failing check is unrelated to the code changes in this PR.

Analysis: The only failing check is checklist (reviewer checklist), which reports "0 out of 58 checklist items" completed. This check requires a reviewer to post and complete the reviewer checklist in a PR comment — it is not a code or CI issue.

Evidence: All code-related checks are passing: ESLint, Prettier, builds (all 4 variants), spellcheck, verifySignedCommits, CLA, and unused styles. The author checklist (checklist from the checklist workflow) also passes. The remaining pending checks (tests, typecheck, Storybook, perf-tests) are still running but unrelated to this failure.

This check will resolve once a reviewer posts and completes the reviewer checklist.

github-actions · 2026-02-12T15:38:59Z

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

github-actions · 2026-02-12T15:43:01Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82221.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-944c4681d4a336c1bd727e78c84f89cad99d5684-6e0bd734832aca5e0c011b5db4ce7b6116b4a25a/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-944c4681d4a336c1bd727e78c84f89cad99d5684-35afce3bd2fca5c95529c935475466eeae913220/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://82221.pr-testing.expensify.com

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

joekaufmanexpensify

Good from a product perspective

MelvinBot · 2026-02-12T15:54:13Z

Fixed the failing checklist check. The root cause was a previous MelvinBot comment (now deleted) that contained the literal text ## Reviewer Checklist in its explanation of the check failure. The CI workflow (reviewerChecklist.js) scans comments for the first occurrence of # Reviewer Checklist and matched that MelvinBot comment instead of @ShridharGoel's actual reviewer checklist — finding 0 checkboxes and failing.

I've deleted the offending comment. The checklist workflow triggers on pull_request_review events, so it needs to be re-triggered — either by re-running the failed workflow or by submitting a new review.

shawnborton · 2026-02-12T15:57:06Z

Seems to work well to me. @ShridharGoel can you do a final review please? Thanks!

MelvinBot assigned shawnborton Feb 12, 2026

MelvinBot requested a review from a team February 12, 2026 05:41

MelvinBot mentioned this pull request Feb 12, 2026

[$250] “Get Paid Back by My Employer” Option Uses Full Illustration Instead of Simple Illustration #82180

Open

7 tasks

shawnborton reviewed Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Rename SimpleReceiptUpload to ReceiptsUpload per review feedback

c289bde

Co-authored-by: Shawn Borton <shawnborton@users.noreply.github.com>

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

MelvinBot marked this pull request as ready for review February 12, 2026 07:28

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 12, 2026 07:28

melvin-bot bot requested a review from ShridharGoel February 12, 2026 07:29

melvin-bot bot requested review from joekaufmanexpensify and removed request for a team February 12, 2026 07:29

ShridharGoel reviewed Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Rename ReceiptsUpload to SimpleReceiptUpload to avoid confusion with …

8a3caa4

…existing ReceiptUpload Co-authored-by: Shridhar Goel <ShridharGoel@users.noreply.github.com>

MelvinBot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 12, 2026 12:48

melvin-bot bot requested a review from ShridharGoel February 12, 2026 12:48

melvin-bot bot removed the request for review from a team February 12, 2026 12:48

ShridharGoel approved these changes Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

melvin-bot bot requested a review from blimpich February 12, 2026 12:53

ShridharGoel approved these changes Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

MelvinBot and others added 2 commits February 12, 2026 14:30

joekaufmanexpensify approved these changes Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

ShridharGoel approved these changes Feb 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

Conversation

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026 • 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!

codecov bot commented Feb 12, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

shawnborton commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

shawnborton commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026

Reviewer Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026

MelvinBot commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

ShridharGoel commented Feb 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading