starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

createsuperuser management command fails #11609

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:47:35 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:35 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @arthanson on GitHub (Sep 12, 2025).

Originally assigned to: @pheus on GitHub.

NetBox Edition

NetBox Community

NetBox Version

v4.5.0 cfcea7c941

Python Version

3.10

Steps to Reproduce

  1. Go to current feature branch of NetBox (commit: cfcea7c941)
  2. Run the management command 'createsuperuser'
  3. Fill out the details of name, email, password

Expected Behavior

The management command should run and create a new user

Observed Behavior

Get a TypeError: User() got unexpected keyword arguments: 'is_staff'

Originally created by @arthanson on GitHub (Sep 12, 2025). Originally assigned to: @pheus on GitHub. ### NetBox Edition NetBox Community ### NetBox Version v4.5.0 cfcea7c9418649491c5540adf650621b04f75091 ### Python Version 3.10 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. Go to current feature branch of NetBox (commit: cfcea7c9418649491c5540adf650621b04f75091) 2. Run the management command 'createsuperuser' 3. Fill out the details of name, email, password ### Expected Behavior The management command should run and create a new user ### Observed Behavior Get a `TypeError: User() got unexpected keyword arguments: 'is_staff'`
adam added the type: bugstatus: acceptedseverity: low labels 2025-12-29 21:47:35 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:47:35 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:36 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 12, 2025):

This was caused by removing the is_staff field from the User model under #16137.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 12, 2025): This was caused by removing the `is_staff` field from the User model under #16137.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:36 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2025):

It seems the create_superuser() method of Django’s UserManager needs to be overridden, similar to create_user().

Django supports async operations (see the async docs). Although NetBox doesn’t run under ASGI, should we also include async counterparts for parity?

I’d like to contribute this fix. Could you please assign the issue to me? Thanks!

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 13, 2025): It seems the `create_superuser()` method of Django’s `UserManager` needs to be **overridden**, similar to `create_user()`. Django supports async operations (see the [async docs](https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/5.2/topics/async/)). Although NetBox doesn’t run under ASGI, should we also include async counterparts for parity? I’d like to contribute this fix. Could you please assign the issue to me? Thanks!
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025):

All yours, @pheus . Which async operations are you thinking of?

Also, please make sure the PR targets feature for this one.

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025): All yours, @pheus . Which async operations are you thinking of? Also, please make sure the PR targets `feature` for this one.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025):

Thanks, @jnovinger! I’ll open the PR against feature.

Re async: I’m referring to Django’s UserManager.acreate_user() and acreate_superuser(). Both default to setting is_staff, so they’d hit the same issue if/when NetBox runs under ASGI. I can mirror the sync override for those (drop is_staff; enforce is_superuser=True).
Would you like me to include the async variants in this PR, or keep it sync‑only?

    def create_user(self, username, email=None, password=None, **extra_fields):
        extra_fields.setdefault("is_staff", False)
        extra_fields.setdefault("is_superuser", False)
        return self._create_user(username, email, password, **extra_fields)

    async def acreate_user(self, username, email=None, password=None, **extra_fields):
        extra_fields.setdefault("is_staff", False)
        extra_fields.setdefault("is_superuser", False)
        return await self._acreate_user(username, email, password, **extra_fields)

Ref: 1dbf415a18/django/contrib/auth/models.py (L172-L212)

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 14, 2025): Thanks, @jnovinger! I’ll open the PR against `feature`. Re async: I’m referring to Django’s `UserManager.acreate_user()` and `acreate_superuser()`. Both default to setting `is_staff`, so they’d hit the same issue if/when NetBox runs under ASGI. I can mirror the sync override for those (drop `is_staff`; enforce `is_superuser=True`). Would you like me to include the async variants in this PR, or keep it sync‑only? ```python def create_user(self, username, email=None, password=None, **extra_fields): extra_fields.setdefault("is_staff", False) extra_fields.setdefault("is_superuser", False) return self._create_user(username, email, password, **extra_fields) async def acreate_user(self, username, email=None, password=None, **extra_fields): extra_fields.setdefault("is_staff", False) extra_fields.setdefault("is_superuser", False) return await self._acreate_user(username, email, password, **extra_fields) ``` Ref: https://github.com/django/django/blob/1dbf415a1829a0bacd8cb31a8da5f2a99c5ea465/django/contrib/auth/models.py#L172-L212
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:37 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025):

Ah, thanks. I somehow completely missed those when I looked. 🤦

I'd lean toward also covering them, for safety sake, even though we're not currently using them. My thinking is we've got the context now, why not use it, rather than wait for a bug report later and have to investigate again.

@jnovinger commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025): Ah, thanks. I somehow completely missed those when I looked. 🤦 I'd lean toward also covering them, for safety sake, even though we're not currently using them. My thinking is we've got the context now, why not use it, rather than wait for a bug report later and have to investigate again.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:47:38 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025):

Thanks, @jnovinger ! Totally agree.
I’ve updated the PR to include the async counterparts (acreate_user and acreate_superuser) mirroring the sync changes. Appreciate the guidance!

@pheus commented on GitHub (Sep 15, 2025): Thanks, @jnovinger ! Totally agree. I’ve updated the PR to include the async counterparts (`acreate_user` and `acreate_superuser`) mirroring the sync changes. Appreciate the guidance!
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label severity: low status: accepted type: bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#11609
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?