[FR] Allow places to be edited by all participants in a Trip

[Ruthalas]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

As far as I can tell, only the original creator of a Place can edit it. When on a trip with friends, sometime they find useful information and want to update that Place.

Describe the solution you'd like

I'd like a toggle on the Place editing page that says "allow all travelers on this Trip to edit this place", or something like that. This would only be visible when a specific Trip is open.

Additional context

No response

Could you implement it?

No - I can't implement it right now

Implementation plan (optional)

No response

[itskovacs]

Hi 👋,

Indeed, places are not trips-scoped, it still belongs to one user (e.g. if one deletes a place, it is removed from all trips), it's not a copy but the actual user object pointed. In this scenario anyone could mutate another user's places.

I'd like a toggle on the Place editing page that says "allow all travelers on this Trip to edit this place", or something like that. This would only be visible when a specific Trip is open.

I do understand this though, only restriction for me is the architecture 😓

[sjorge]

I do understand this though, only restriction for me is the architecture 😓

Would moving places to a separate table and have user <-> place and trip <-> place relation work database wise?

Then only remove a place if there are no relations to either a user or a place, this also allows for a user to delete the 'place' from their map but it keeps the place available for trips. This also allows the user that created the trip to enable the request option to allow participants to update the place as access can then be enfored on the user -> trip (where the toggle allows or disallows this) -> place boundary and user -> place (if the user is the owner).

I guess this technically also allows multiple users to own a single place, I think there was an FR at some point for sharing places with other users outside of a trip which is then also possible.

This would be a lot of migrations on the current db I think though so probably not worth the hassle.