feat: disable value and segment change for in-flight feature

[tiagoapolo]

Thanks for submitting a PR! Please check the boxes below:

• I have added information to docs/ if required so people know about the feature!
• I have filled in the "Changes" section below?
• I have filled in the "How did you test this code" section below?
• I have used a Conventional Commit title for this Pull Request

Changes

#5811

How did you test this code?

Please describe.

[vercel]

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

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
flagsmith-frontend-preview	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Jul 29, 2025 8:03pm
flagsmith-frontend-staging	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	💬 Add feedback	Jul 29, 2025 8:03pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Comments	Updated (UTC)
docs	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)			Jul 29, 2025 8:03pm

[github-actions]

Docker builds report

Image	Build Status	Security report
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith-api-test:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Skipped
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith-e2e:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Skipped
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith-api:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Results ✅
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Results ✅
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith-private-cloud:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Results ✅
ghcr.io/flagsmith/flagsmith-frontend:pr-5853	Finished ✅	Results ✅

[Zaimwa9]

Approving but we really need to deal with CreateFlag. There are lot of redundancy (out of scope ofc) and deep down I don't think this should be wrapping so much JSX but it's too much refacto otherwise

[tiagoapolo]

Approving but we really need to deal with CreateFlag. There are lot of redundancy (out of scope ofc) and deep down I don't think this should be wrapping so much JSX but it's too much refacto otherwise

Yes, initially I started doing some refactors but it was too much for a simple task