feat: add show_in_map field#664
Open
eStarKee06 wants to merge 1 commit intoGreenstand:masterfrom
Open
Conversation
This was referenced Apr 12, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This addresses the issue Greenstand/treetracker-admin-client#1038 by adding the field in the column.
This is the BE change to add the field for the show_in_map field. The migration run through npm did not work on my end anymore so I ran this SQL query manually.
Discussion 1
Should we create a script that sets the existing records to
show_in_map=True. This is because if we just deploy this change, all the growers will be hidden so there should be some Backward Compat handling.Discussion 2
I have a few thoughts I want to share here. I mainly followed the requirement in the issue but I'm wondering if we want to be updating the API calls in the Map Web FE Client to add a filter? Or should we be adding this at the auth level?
I haven't fully checked the feasibility or how I will do it yet but I was thinking something like:
show_in_mapfield can be renamed as something likestatus: str enumoris_valid: boolean. This way the field is more "generic" and there's more flexibility in how it can be used in the case that requirements get updatedis_valid != trueorstatus != 'valid'. We will base it off of user role/permissions rather than search params or filters. If the sensitivity of this requirement increases, there is more security in the BE.