Allow More Granularity For Sharing Saved Filters #10685

New Issue

adam · 2025-12-29T21:34:44+01:00

adam commented

2025-12-29 21:34:44 +01:00

Originally created by @mr1716 on GitHub (Jan 23, 2025).

NetBox version

v4.2.2

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

Right now, the options for Sharing a Saved Filter is all or nothing. What I mean is that users have options in determining whether this filter is intended for use by all users or only its owner. It would make Saved Filters significantly easier to utilize if there were a third option, which would share the saved filter with specific user groups. Also sharing the filter with specific individuals would be helpful too.

Use case

I currently work in a multi-user environment where there are several different groups using Saved Filters. For these groups to share Saved Filters requires either sharing with everyone in the UI or having everyone recreate the saved filter. It would make the tool significantly easier to use if 1 user could create the Saved Filter and share it with their group/team with a built in share with group feature.

Having Saved Filters be shareable in a more detailed manner would increase usability.

Originally created by @mr1716 on GitHub (Jan 23, 2025). ### NetBox version v4.2.2 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality Right now, the options for Sharing a Saved Filter is all or nothing. What I mean is that users have options in determining whether this filter is intended for use by all users or only its owner. It would make Saved Filters significantly easier to utilize if there were a third option, which would share the saved filter with specific user groups. Also sharing the filter with specific individuals would be helpful too. ### Use case I currently work in a multi-user environment where there are several different groups using Saved Filters. For these groups to share Saved Filters requires either sharing with everyone in the UI or having everyone recreate the saved filter. It would make the tool significantly easier to use if 1 user could create the Saved Filter and share it with their group/team with a built in share with group feature. Having Saved Filters be shareable in a more detailed manner would increase usability.

adam added the type: feature netbox needs milestone status: backlog breaking change complexity: low labels 2025-12-29 21:34:44 +01:00

adam commented

2025-12-29 21:34:47 +01:00

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Feb 27, 2025):

To keep complexity low I would suggest keeping to existing Users and Groups as the objects that can be assigned to a filter, rather than introducing new models such as "saved filter user groups".

@bctiemann commented on GitHub (Feb 27, 2025): To keep complexity low I would suggest keeping to existing Users and Groups as the objects that can be assigned to a filter, rather than introducing new models such as "saved filter user groups".

adam commented

2025-12-29 21:34:47 +01:00

@mr1716 commented on GitHub (Feb 28, 2025):

@bctiemann, the idea is that just like permissions can be applied to existing users and groups, saved filters would work like that.

The intent was NEVER to have different saved filter groups as compared to the existing users and groups. I do NOT want to create new saved user filter groups, as that would add more complexity than needed or desired with this request.

@mr1716 commented on GitHub (Feb 28, 2025): @bctiemann, the idea is that just like permissions can be applied to existing users and groups, saved filters would work like that. The intent was NEVER to have different saved filter groups as compared to the existing users and groups. I do NOT want to create new saved user filter groups, as that would add more complexity than needed or desired with this request.

adam commented

2025-12-29 21:34:48 +01:00

@rizlas commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025):

The same concept described by @mr1716 can be applied to table configs. At least the possibility to share to a subset of users instead of global (or not global) would be great.

@rizlas commented on GitHub (Oct 27, 2025): The same concept described by @mr1716 can be applied to table configs. At least the possibility to share to a subset of users instead of global (or not global) would be great.

adam commented

2025-12-29 21:34:48 +01:00

@mr1716 commented on GitHub (Nov 18, 2025):

When I created this ticket; the table configs filters weren’t there in the product. If it were, then it would’ve included that. Thanks for extending this ticket @rizlas

@mr1716 commented on GitHub (Nov 18, 2025): When I created this ticket; the table configs filters weren’t there in the product. If it were, then it would’ve included that. Thanks for extending this ticket @rizlas

Sign in to join this conversation.

Branches Tags

main

21102-fix-graphiql-explorer

update-changelog-comments-docs

20911-dropdown

20239-plugin-menu-classes-mutable-state

21097-graphql-id-lookups

feature

fix_module_substitution

20923-dcim-templates

20044-elevation-stuck-lightmode

feature-ip-prefix-link

v4.5-beta1-release

20068-import-moduletype-attrs

20766-fix-german-translation-code-literals

20378-del-script

7604-filter-modifiers-v3

circuit-swap

12318-case-insensitive-uniqueness

20637-improve-device-q-filter

20660-script-load

19724-graphql

20614-update-ruff

14884-script

02496-max-page

19720-macaddress-interface-generic-relation

19408-circuit-terminations-export-templates

20203-openapi-check

fix-19669-api-image-download

7604-filter-modifiers

19275-fixes-interface-bulk-edit

fix-17794-get_field_value_return_list

11507-show-aggregate-and-rir-on-api

9583-add_column_specific_search_field_to_tables

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#10685