feat: extract standalone FV intro screen, improve reverify UX, merge bounty spec

[Copilot]

Monolithic screens/IntroScreen.jsx mixed standalone FV-flow components with deprecated native-flow components (Intro, IntroReVerification), and standalone/AppRouter reached back through the main barrel to import FaceVerificationIntro. Reverify users also saw the same Overview screen as new users, lacked a "Last verified" date, and weren't required to confirm the age checkbox.

Structural changes

• New standalone/screens/IntroScreen.jsx — migrated IntroFVFlowOverview, IntroFVFlowAction, IntroFVFlow, WalletDeletedPopupText, WarningBlock, shortenWalletAddress, own getStylesFromProps; no isFVFlow references anywhere; all gate hooks preserved (useDisposingState, useFVLoginInfoCheck, camera permission, useFaceTecSDK)
• Deleted screens/IntroScreen.jsx — deprecated Intro and IntroReVerification components gone, file removed
• standalone/AppRouter.jsx — rewired import to ./screens/IntroScreen
• standalone/index.js — exports FaceVerificationIntro from new location
• faceVerification/index.js — FaceVerificationIntro export removed

Reverify UX improvements

• IntroFVFlow initialises showActionScreen = isReverify → reverify users skip Overview and land directly on the Action screen
• Action screen renders Wallet Linked box with "Last verified: {date}" for reverify users (zero-value guarded via lastAuthenticated?.isZero())
• Age confirmation checkbox now shown and required for all users; button disabled until both checkboxes are ticked

// IntroFVFlow — reverify users skip the overview
const [showActionScreen, setShowActionScreen] = useState(isReverify)

// IntroScreen — lastVerified derived from on-chain timestamp
const lastVerified = useMemo(() => {
  const ts = expiryDate?.lastAuthenticated
  return ts && !ts.isZero() ? moment.unix(ts.toNumber()).format('l') : null
}, [expiryDate?.lastAuthenticated])

// IntroFVFlowAction — both checkboxes required for everyone
disabled={!ageConfirmed || !goodDollarOnlyConfirmed}

Tests & bounty spec

• __tests__/IntroScreen.jsx updated: useIdentityExpiryDate mocked via jest.mock; snapshot tests for both isReverify === false and isReverify === true paths
• .bounties/20260417-fv-intro-screen-flow/ spec artifacts (from PR chore: add bounty spec — FV standalone intro screen flow #4376) merged into this branch

Warning

Firewall rules blocked me from connecting to one or more addresses (expand for details)

I tried to connect to the following addresses, but was blocked by firewall rules:

• explorer.fuse.io
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen -u --no-coverage --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage --no�� --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage /hom�� e (dns block)
• forno.celo.org
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen -u --no-coverage --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage --no�� --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage /hom�� e (dns block)
• rpc.fuse.io
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen -u --no-coverage --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage --no�� --noprofile (dns block)
  • Triggering command: /home/REDACTED/work/_temp/ghcca-node/node/bin/node node ./node_modules/.bin/jest --testPathPattern=faceVerification/__tests__/IntroScreen --no-coverage /hom�� e (dns block)

If you need me to access, download, or install something from one of these locations, you can either:

• Configure Actions setup steps to set up my environment, which run before the firewall is enabled
• Add the appropriate URLs or hosts to the custom allowlist in this repository's Copilot coding agent settings (admins only)

Original prompt

Okay, the pull-request itself was supposed to be a starting point. it should be turned into the action plan/executing of the bounty/issue.
you can go ahead and update the pull-requests description to indicate this and then start applying the requested fixes in the bounty-spec

[Chronological Review: The conversation began with the user requesting to ensure that bounty artifacts were aligned, pushing local changes to the origin, creating a pull request from the current feature branch, and creating an issue in the repository based on a specified file. The user then paused the execution to clarify that the branch was stale and needed updates. After pulling in the latest changes, the user instructed to continue with the execution plan, indicating that the pull request should serve as a starting point for an action plan related to the bounty. The user requested to update the pull request description and start applying requested fixes from the bounty specification.]

[Intent Mapping:

1. "make sure the bounty artifacts are aligned" - User wants to ensure all changes are consistent.
2. "push our local changes to origin and create an initial pull-request" - User requests to push changes and create a pull request.
3. "create an issue in the repository with the details of @file:03_bounty_spec.md" - User wants to create an issue based on a specific file.
4. "the pull-request itself was supposed to be a starting point" - User clarifies the purpose of the pull request and requests updates to its description and action plan.]

[Technical Inventory:

• Repository: GoodDAPP
• Current branch: master
• Default branch: master
• User is working with Git for version control and managing pull requests.]

[Code Archaeology: No specific files or code changes were detailed in the conversation, but the user referenced a bounty specification file (@file:03_bounty_spec.md) that will inform the updates needed.]

[Progress Assessment:

• Completed Tasks: User pulled the latest changes to align the branch with the remote repository.
• Partially Complete Work: User has not yet pushed changes or created the pull request, but has outlined the steps to be taken.]

[Context Validation: All necessary context for continuing work is captured, including the need to update the pull request and apply fixes from the bounty specification.]

[Recent Commands Analysis:

• Last Agent Commands: User requested to pause execution, then later confirmed to continue after pulling changes.
• Tool Results Summary: The repository information was provided, confirming the current branch and its status.
• Pre-Summary State: The agent was preparing to push changes and create a pull request when the token budget was exceeded.
• Operation Context: The commands executed were directly related to the user's goals of aligning artifacts, pushing changes, and creating a pull request for the bounty issue.]

1. Conversation Overview: - Primary Objectives: - "make sure the bounty artifacts are aligned" - "push our local changes to origin and create an initial pull-request" - "create an issue in the repository with the details of @file:03_bounty_spec.md" - "the pull-request itself was supposed to be a starting point" - Session Context: The conversation involved ensuring alignment of code artifacts, managing Git operations, and setting up a pull request and issue for a bounty. - User Intent Evolution: The user initially focused on alignment and pushing changes, then clarified the purpose of the pull request and requested updates to its description.

2. Technical Foundation:

• Repository: GoodDAPP
• Current Branch: master
• Default Branch: master

3. Codebase Status:

• No specific files were modified or discussed in detail, but the user referenced a bounty specification file for upcoming changes.

4. Problem Resolution:

• Issues Encountered: The branch was stale and needed to be updated with the latest changes.
• Solutions Implemented: User pulled the latest changes to align the branch.
• Debugging Context: No ongoing troubleshooting was mentioned, but the user clarified the need for alignment.
• Lessons Learned: Importance of keeping branches updated to avoid misalignment.

5. Progress Tracking:

• Completed Tasks: User successfully pulled the latest changes.
• Partially Complete Work: User has yet to push changes or create the pull request.
• Validated Outcomes: No specific features or code confirmed working through testing yet.

6. Active Work State:

• Current Focus: Updating the pull request description and applying fixes from the bounty specification.
• Recent Context: User confirmed the branch was updated and requested to proceed with the execution plan.
• Working Code: No specific code snippets were discussed recently.
• Immediate Context: User is preparing to update the pull request and apply requested fixes.

7. Recent Operations:

• Last Agent Commands: User requested to pause execution, then confirmed to continue after pullin...

Created from VS Code.

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

3 Skipped Deployments

Project	Deployment	Actions	Updated (UTC)
gooddollar-delta	Ignored	Preview	Apr 17, 2026 7:42am
goodid	Ignored	Preview	Apr 17, 2026 7:42am
goodwallet	Ignored		Apr 17, 2026 7:42am

[L03TJ3]

Because the flow needs a verified signer its not easy to instruct copilot to test these screens.
The screens and flow:

Only seen by users that reverify

Only seen by new users