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 #19102] [MERGED] Fixes #19092: scope type selection lost when editing multiple/all objects #15526

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-30 00:22:29 +01:00 by adam · 0 comments
adam commented 2025-12-30 00:22:29 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/19102
Author: @jnovinger
Created: 4/7/2025
Status: ✅ Merged
Merged: 4/9/2025
Merged by: @jeremystretch

Base: main ← Head: 19092-bulk-edit-loses-scope-type-choice

📝 Commits (1)

  • c03072f Fixes #19092: scope type selection lost when editing multiple/all objects

📊 Changes

1 file changed (+3 additions, -5 deletions)

View changed files

📝 netbox/netbox/views/generic/bulk_views.py (+3 -5)

📄 Description

Fixes: #19092

This essentially reverts the previous fix for #18964, which attempted to fix the issue with some objects not being updated when the "select all

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/pull/19102 **Author:** [@jnovinger](https://github.com/jnovinger) **Created:** 4/7/2025 **Status:** ✅ Merged **Merged:** 4/9/2025 **Merged by:** [@jeremystretch](https://github.com/jeremystretch) **Base:** `main` ← **Head:** `19092-bulk-edit-loses-scope-type-choice` --- ### 📝 Commits (1) - [`c03072f`](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/commit/c03072f45be7db43a6f7d4526b8a3758d583cae9) Fixes #19092: scope type selection lost when editing multiple/all objects ### 📊 Changes **1 file changed** (+3 additions, -5 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `netbox/netbox/views/generic/bulk_views.py` (+3 -5) </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 approved and assigned prior to opening a pull request. This helps avoid waste time and effort on a proposed change that we might not be able to accept. IF YOUR PULL REQUEST DOES NOT REFERENCE AN ISSUE WHICH HAS BEEN ASSIGNED TO YOU, IT WILL BE CLOSED AUTOMATICALLY. Please specify your assigned issue number on the line below. --> ### Fixes: #19092 This essentially reverts the previous fix for #18964, which attempted to fix the issue with some objects not being updated when the "select all <n> <object type>s matching query" checkbox was marked by restoring an `else` clause that had been removed in the fix for #18194. However, doing so regressed the fix for #18194 while still leaving most of the changes for that fix in place. Rather than trying to guess all of the possible fields that might need to be stuffed in to `initial_data` across all bulk edit view/form combinations, I took the approach of making a copy of `request.POST` and over-writing the `pk` list with what ever we determined to use earlier in the `BulkEditView.post()` method. With this approach, anything that is set in the form is still transmitted to the form instance via `request.POST` but the `pk` list set in `initial_data` is instead overridden by the expected value. The end result is that all users selections on the form, as well as the object selections to edit, are preserved for the next iteration of the form. <!-- Please include a summary of the proposed changes below. --> --- <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 2025-12-30 00:22:29 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-30 00:22:29 +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#15526
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?