Skip to content

[No QA] Order CODEOWNERS so the workflows rule takes precedence - #891

Merged
NicolasBonet merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
nicolas-codeowners-order
Nov 11, 2026
Merged

NicolasBonet merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
nicolas-codeowners-order

Conversation

@NicolasBonet

@NicolasBonet NicolasBonet commented Nov 10, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Details

In CODEOWNERS the last matching pattern wins. Because * @Expensify/pullerbear came after the .github/workflows/ rule, it also matched workflow files and the dedicated workflow owners were never requested.

This puts the * rule first so the .github/workflows/ rule applies to workflow changes, which is the same ordering App uses. expensify-common has the same file and gets the same $ Expensify/expensify-common#971

Related Issues

https://github.com/Expensify/Expensify/issues/702575

Linked E/App PR

N/A. This only changes .github/CODEOWNERS, so nothing ships to npm and App is unaffected.

Automated Tests

None needed. No code changes.

Manual Tests

  1. After merge, open a PR that touches a file in .github/workflows/.
  2. Confirm @AndrewGable, @coleaeason and @rafecolton are requested as code owners.
  3. Confirm a PR touching any other file still requests @Expensify/pullerbear.

Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Related Issues section above
  • I linked the corresponding Expensify/App PR in the ### Linked E/App PR section above, and verified this change against it (E/App CI passed and manual testing completed)
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • 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 / Chrome
    • iOS / native
    • iOS / 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 the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • 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 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.js 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 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
    • If we are not using the full Onyx data that we loaded, I've added the proper selector in order to ensure the component only re-renders when the data it is using changes
    • 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 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 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 author checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

N/A, no app changes.

Android: mWeb Chrome

N/A, no app changes.

iOS: Native

N/A, no app changes.

iOS: mWeb Safari

N/A, no app changes.

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

N/A, no app changes.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Nov 10, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codex Review Summary: ✅ Completed

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-11-10T21:04:42.030351Z b83d06b PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@melvin-bot
melvin-bot Bot requested review from marcochavezf and removed request for a team November 10, 2026 21:04
@NicolasBonet NicolasBonet changed the title Order CODEOWNERS so the workflows rule takes precedence [No QA] Order CODEOWNERS so the workflows rule takes precedence Nov 10, 2026
@aldo-expensify

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
Error: The "Linked E/App PR" section must contain a single Expensify/App PR URL (e.g. https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/12345), found: "N/A. This only changes `.github/CODEOWNERS`, so nothing ships to npm and App is unaffected.".

@NicolasBonet
NicolasBonet merged commit 6ed77e8 into main Nov 11, 2026
11 of 18 checks passed
@os-botify

os-botify Bot commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🚀 Published to npm in 3.0.150 🎉

@melvin-bot melvin-bot Bot added the Emergency label Nov 11, 2026
@melvin-bot

melvin-bot Bot commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@NicolasBonet looks like this was merged without a test passing. These checks had not passed on b83d06b when it was merged:

Please add a note explaining why this was done and remove the Emergency label if this is not an emergency.

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants