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

Expand status choices for Site model #3859

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 18:31:38 +01:00 by adam · 0 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 18:31:38 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @tyler-8 on GitHub (Jul 14, 2020).

Environment

  • Python version: v3.6.8
  • NetBox version: v2.8.7

Proposed Functionality

Adding two options to the 'Status' choices for Site:

  • Staging (staging)
  • Decommissioning (decommissioning)

Use Case

The site lifecycle can be more complex than 'Planned, Active, Retired' in many cases. Suppose a site was in the process of being Retired. It would be a good signalling point to mark as Decommissioning for ensuring that circuit disconnects and/or equipment removals were initiated or have completed. It would also allow for reporting and tracking of any sites that were 'Decommissioning' and still had assets that were not in their 'fully removed' state - with the goal of having the Site marked Retired as the very last thing.

On the flip side, Staging would help to indicate that the site is undergoing staging work - equipment may be intermittently reachable, not in final physical location, etc.

While this could be worked around using a mixture of tags, I think adding these choices to Status makes more sense for the data model and also brings Site status more in line with the lifecycle of devices and circuits.

Database Changes

None

External Dependencies

None

I'm happy to tackle the PR if approved.

Originally created by @tyler-8 on GitHub (Jul 14, 2020). <!-- NOTE: IF YOUR ISSUE DOES NOT FOLLOW THIS TEMPLATE, IT WILL BE CLOSED. This form is only for proposing specific new features or enhancements. If you have a general idea or question, please post to our mailing list instead of opening an issue: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/netbox-discuss NOTE: Due to an excessive backlog of feature requests, we are not currently accepting any proposals which significantly extend NetBox's feature scope. Please describe the environment in which you are running NetBox. Be sure that you are running an unmodified instance of the latest stable release before submitting a bug report. --> ### Environment * Python version: v3.6.8<!-- Example: 3.6.9 --> * NetBox version: v2.8.7<!-- Example: 2.7.3 --> <!-- Describe in detail the new functionality you are proposing. Include any specific changes to work flows, data models, or the user interface. --> ### Proposed Functionality Adding two options to the 'Status' choices for `Site`: - Staging (`staging`) - Decommissioning (`decommissioning`) <!-- Convey an example use case for your proposed feature. Write from the perspective of a NetBox user who would benefit from the proposed functionality and describe how. ---> ### Use Case The site lifecycle can be more complex than 'Planned, Active, Retired' in many cases. Suppose a site was in the process of being `Retired`. It would be a good signalling point to mark as `Decommissioning` for ensuring that circuit disconnects and/or equipment removals were initiated or have completed. It would also allow for reporting and tracking of any sites that were 'Decommissioning' and still had assets that were not in their 'fully removed' state - with the goal of having the Site marked `Retired` as the very last thing. On the flip side, `Staging` would help to indicate that the site is undergoing staging work - equipment may be intermittently reachable, not in final physical location, etc. While this could be worked around using a mixture of tags, I think adding these choices to `Status` makes more sense for the data model and also brings Site status more in line with the lifecycle of devices and circuits. <!-- Note any changes to the database schema necessary to support the new feature. For example, does the proposal require adding a new model or field? (Not all new features require database changes.) ---> ### Database Changes None <!-- List any new dependencies on external libraries or services that this new feature would introduce. For example, does the proposal require the installation of a new Python package? (Not all new features introduce new dependencies.) --> ### External Dependencies None I'm happy to tackle the PR if approved.
adam added the status: acceptedtype: feature labels 2025-12-29 18:31:38 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 18:31:38 +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 status: accepted type: feature
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#3859
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?