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

[PR #5632] [CLOSED] Implemented WebRequestContext for emulating HTTP requests for ORM operations #13041

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 22:25:06 +01:00 by adam · 0 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 22:25:06 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/5632
Author: @lampwins
Created: 1/17/2021
Status: ❌ Closed

Base: develop ← Head: 4932-web-request-context-manager

📝 Commits (1)

  • 7471adb closes #4932 - added WebRequestContext for emulating HTTP requests for ORM operations

📊 Changes

3 files changed (+138 additions, -0 deletions)

View changed files

📝 docs/administration/netbox-shell.md (+16 -0)
📝 netbox/extras/context_managers.py (+46 -0)
➕ netbox/extras/tests/test_context_managers.py (+76 -0)

📄 Description

Fixes: #4932

This implements a new WebRequestContext context manager for emulating HTTP requests for ORM use. The primary need is for easily enabling change logging and webhooks when interacting with the ORM directly, and outside of the context of an HTTP request.

You will likely note the use of RequestFactory for creating the "fake" request object. I feel this is the safest way of doing this because it ensures we don't break anything in the future if we require more context from the request than just the user. When looking at the internals of RequestFactory, there is nothing specific to its primary usage in testing that should cause any issues here. I started down the path of doing pretty much the same thing it does to create a bare-bones WSGIRequest object and then decided this would be a better, cleaner approach.

🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/5632 **Author:** [@lampwins](https://github.com/lampwins) **Created:** 1/17/2021 **Status:** ❌ Closed **Base:** `develop` ← **Head:** `4932-web-request-context-manager` --- ### 📝 Commits (1) - [`7471adb`](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/commit/7471adb57251b409db0751327c1c873ba68130f4) closes #4932 - added WebRequestContext for emulating HTTP requests for ORM operations ### 📊 Changes **3 files changed** (+138 additions, -0 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `docs/administration/netbox-shell.md` (+16 -0) 📝 `netbox/extras/context_managers.py` (+46 -0) ➕ `netbox/extras/tests/test_context_managers.py` (+76 -0) </details> ### 📄 Description <!-- Thank you for your interest in contributing to NetBox! Please note that our contribution policy requires that a feature request or bug report be opened for approval prior to filing a pull request. This helps avoid wasting time and effort on something that we might not be able to accept. Please indicate the relevant feature request or bug report below. IF YOUR PULL REQUEST DOES NOT REFERENCE AN ACCEPTED BUG REPORT OR FEATURE REQUEST, IT WILL BE MARKED AS INVALID AND CLOSED. --> ### Fixes: #4932 <!-- Please include a summary of the proposed changes below. --> This implements a new `WebRequestContext` context manager for emulating HTTP requests for ORM use. The primary need is for easily enabling change logging and webhooks when interacting with the ORM directly, and outside of the context of an HTTP request. You will likely note the use of `RequestFactory` for creating the "fake" request object. I feel this is the safest way of doing this because it ensures we don't break anything in the future if we require more context from the request than just the user. When looking at the internals of `RequestFactory`, there is nothing specific to its primary usage in testing that should cause any issues here. I started down the path of doing pretty much the same thing it does to create a bare-bones `WSGIRequest` object and then decided this would be a better, cleaner approach. --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>
adam added the pull-request label 2025-12-29 22:25:06 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 22:25:06 +01:00
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 pull-request
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#13041
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?