[No QA] Fix import/no-cycle - part 1 - follow up

[LukasMod]

Explanation of Change

Regarding #99670 (comment)

src/libs/Middleware/register.ts used to run its addMiddleware calls at module scope, so importing the module was the registration. It now exports a default registerMiddlewares() function that callers invoke, guarded by a module-level hasRegistered flag so repeated calls are no-ops.

Callers updated from import '@libs/Middleware/register' to importing and calling the function:

• src/setup/index.ts calls it first inside the default setup function
• .storybook/preview.tsx calls it before Onyx.init
• tests/ui/SearchPageTest.tsx and tests/unit/TransactionGroupListItemTest.tsx call it at module top level
• tests/utils/TestHelper.ts calls it on import, since tests that pull in this helper can issue API calls without going through setupApp(). The idempotency guard is what makes this safe alongside setupApp()'s own registration.
• tests/unit/MiddlewareRegistrationTest.ts calls the function instead of require-ing the module, which removes the note about jest.isolateModules breaking identity checks.

The middleware list and its ordering are unchanged, including the constraint that SaveResponseInOnyx runs last among Onyx-writing middlewares.

Why

A bare side-effect import is easy to drop by accident: an import with no binding looks unused, and formatters or import-sorting tools can reorder it relative to code that depends on it having run. Making registration a call means the dependency is visible at the call site and the ordering inside setup/index.ts is explicit rather than implicit in import order.

Fixed Issues

$ #99650
PROPOSAL:

Tests

• Verify that no errors appear in the JS console

Offline tests

QA Steps

• 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.2026-09-01.at.12.35.47.mov

[LukasMod]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cc25abc138

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".

[LukasMod]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please.

Reviewed commit: 95878080c2

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".

[melvin-bot]

@thelullabyy 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]

[thelullabyy]

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 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 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)
• 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)
• If a new component is created I verified that:
  • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
  • All props are defined accurately
  • 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
  • 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 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.
• 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

Screen.Recording.2026-09-05.at.03.05.13.mov

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #100009.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-8ed3660-1cbcddc-81876a55ed677e8d9d0c9d115d41dbda06340917/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-8ed3660-1cbcddc-36b6055526eda6e64437a7efa5134dc32177e0d1/index.html

Web 🕸️
https://100009.pr-testing.expensify.com

---

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

[OSBotify]

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

[roryabraham]

@MelvinBot prepare a revert for this PR

[MelvinBot]

🤖 Revert PR is ready as a draft: #100456

It reverts merge commit 8ed3660f6c377227b194f5d1b0e32c0859935678, restoring src/libs/Middleware/register.ts to module-scope addMiddleware calls and putting every caller back on the bare side-effect import.

One thing to know: git revert -m 1 conflicted in two files because HandleMovedScanFailedExpenses landed on main after this PR merged. I resolved both to keep it:

• src/libs/Middleware/register.ts — HandleMovedScanFailedExpenses still registered, at module scope, immediately before SaveResponseInOnyx
• tests/unit/MiddlewareEntryPointTest.ts — expected middleware count stays at 14, not the pre-revert value of 13

Checks I ran locally

All passing on the revert branch:

• npm run lint-changed
• npm run typecheck
• npm run spell-changed (7 files, 0 issues)
• npm test -- tests/unit/MiddlewareEntryPointTest.ts tests/unit/MiddlewareRegistrationTest.ts (4 tests)
• npm test -- tests/ui/SearchPageTest.tsx tests/unit/TransactionGroupListItemTest.tsx (27 tests)
• npm test -- tests/unit/APITest.ts tests/unit/APIWriteWhenReadyTest.ts tests/unit/MiddlewareTest.ts tests/unit/LoadTestMiddlewareTest.ts tests/unit/LoggingMiddlewareTest.ts (96 tests)

Could not run: npm run react-compiler-compliance-check check-changed — the runner sets GITHUB_BASE_REF to an empty string, so the script resolves the base ref to origin/ and errors out. No components or hooks change in this revert (the .tsx files touched are two Jest tests plus .storybook/preview.tsx, and each only changes an import line), so CI should cover it.

Mark it "Ready for review" when you want PullerBear to assign a reviewer.

[OSBotify]

🚀 Deployed to staging by https://github.com/roryabraham in version: 9.4.73-0 🚀

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

[MelvinBot]

🤖 No help site changes are required. I did not create a docs PR.

This PR is an internal refactor only. It converts src/libs/Middleware/register.ts from a side-effect import into an exported registerMiddlewares() function guarded by a hasRegistered flag, then updates the callers (src/setup/index.ts, .storybook/preview.tsx, and four test files) to call it.

Nothing customer-facing changed:

• No UI, feature name, tab, setting label, or button label changed.
• No copy changed — src/languages/* is untouched.
• The middleware list and its ordering are unchanged, including SaveResponseInOnyx running last among Onyx-writing middlewares, so runtime API behavior is identical.
• App/docs/articles documents customer-facing product behavior only. It contains no reference to middleware or app bootstrap internals, so there is no article to update.

The PR title is also already marked [No QA], consistent with no user-visible change.

Since no docs changes were needed, there is no linked help site PR for you to review or mark Ready for review. If you believe a specific article does need updating here, reply with @MelvinBot <article or behavior> and I'll draft the PR.

---

view run · view recording