How Can We Help?
Release Notes, March 15, 2023
Highlights
This release contains multiple fixes along with a couple of new items. Fields created in the MRV will now be automatically tied to the correct program region. As users save or edit fields, the field record will store the appropriate program region. If the field overlaps multiple regions then the MRV will take the largest overlap as the region value. Another change included in this release adds another status to the producer’s workflow. Now, producers that have the ability to submit a producer agreement can now reach a status state of “Crop Data Submitted”. Later releases will build on this to turn the MRV’s current static final review into a dynamic review. This would be similar to the MRV’s Fields and Practice Changes Review.
Once of the fixes in this release corrects the list of fields shown in the soil data table. This should show the producers/fields that have completed a producer agreement. This was previously showing the fields from producers with a status of “Producer Agreement Completed”. This has been adjusted to include the producers/fields that have a status that is past the point where the agreement is signed. Another fix included in this release resolves the naming issue found with the “associated fields”. These areas were previously saving the leading or trailing spaces but will now be trimmed upon save. The full list of release notes has been included below.
Added Features
- The MRV will not support an additional producer status through the producer’s workflow. Users that have the capability to sign a producer agreement are now able to reach the “Crop Data Submitted” status. With this status, the producer would be initiating the final review process. This process will be similar to the Fields and Practice Changes Review and will be part of a later MRV release. At this time the producer will be blocked from the static final review that is currently present in the MRV. The administrative MRV accounts can still utilize this static review page while work is done to turn it into a dynamic page.
Known Issues
- Producers that have self-registered on the registration page will show a status of N/A on the MRV’s admin pages. Once the producer’s enrollment request is approved or denied, the producer’s status will be updated.
- The Fields and Practice Changes Review requires the user to save before the comments and markings are saved in the database. If the reviewer leaves the review before saving their progress, it will not be saved and the reviewer will need to start over.
- Emails will not generate for the Fields and Practices Changes Review approval. This was temporary disabled while the AdobeSign changes are incorporated into the MRV. Once the Adobe sign feature is integrated, producers will receive an email when the Fields and Practice Changes Review is marked as approved and the producer is required to sign a contract for that enrollment/collection year.
Fixed Issues
- The issue with the Crops module having fields that are missing the “2022” collection season has been resolved. Users that had a mixture of fields that included 2021 marked fields, were not able to see the 2022 season at times. This issue has been resolved and will now show the correct years depending on the field. Fields continue to be created with that year of creation plus three additional historical years. Depending on the producer’s data, extra historical seasons might need to be provided. As the field continues in the ESMC program, each field will have an additional season added for each collection year.
- The table showing the fields that would be eligible for soil sampling has been fixed. This was previously only showing the fields from producers that had a status of “Producer Agreement Completed”. This has been changed to still include those producers/fields but also the producers/fields that have moved past the “Producer Agreement Completed” status.
- The producer’s landing page has been fixed to show the correct button to the producer once their Fields and Practice Changes module has been approved. This was previously asking the producers to “continue” when the module requirements had already been completed.