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

Change in display half depth devices on Rack Elevations #4763

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:20:14 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:14 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @proudbro on GitHub (Apr 14, 2021).

NetBox version

2.10.9

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

Add on rack layouts in Rack Elevations section some visual designation for half depth devices mounted on the opposite side of chosen rack side.
It can be shaded unit or so with a name of device.

Now only full depth devices can be visually distinguished by diagonal stripes.
Front
Rear

Screenshots were made in Netbox beta v2.11 https://beta.netbox.dev/dcim/rack-elevations/

Use case

We often plan to install new equipment via Rack Elevations and have to constantly switch between Front/Rear mode to find really free units for devices. This feature will save us from additional clicks and simplify capacity planning for all Netbox users.

Database changes

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @proudbro on GitHub (Apr 14, 2021). ### NetBox version 2.10.9 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality Add on rack layouts in _Rack Elevations_ section some visual designation for half depth devices mounted on the opposite side of chosen rack side. It can be shaded unit or so with a name of device. Now only full depth devices can be visually distinguished by diagonal stripes. ![Front](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/60253505/114702563-e0c41200-9d2c-11eb-9fda-bcd2ce5bc721.png) ![Rear](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/60253505/114702619-f802ff80-9d2c-11eb-9501-93206a14d626.png) _Screenshots were made in Netbox beta v2.11_ https://beta.netbox.dev/dcim/rack-elevations/ ### Use case We often plan to install new equipment via Rack Elevations and have to constantly switch between Front/Rear mode to find really free units for devices. This feature will save us from additional clicks and simplify capacity planning for all Netbox users. ### Database changes - ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 19:20:14 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:20:14 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 14, 2021):

We often plan to install new equipment via Rack Elevations and have to constantly switch between Front/Rear mode to find really free units for devices.

Marking a device as "half-depth" implies that the peer unit on the opposite rack face is available for use. If this is not the case (due to physical depth, airflow requirements, etc.), device should be treated as full-depth.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 14, 2021): > We often plan to install new equipment via Rack Elevations and have to constantly switch between Front/Rear mode to find really free units for devices. Marking a device as "half-depth" implies that the peer unit on the opposite rack face is available for use. If this is not the case (due to physical depth, airflow requirements, etc.), device should be treated as full-depth.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@proudbro commented on GitHub (Apr 15, 2021):

@jeremystretch , I don't suggest to consider such unit as occupied. I just want to see unit more visually differ somehow from others and at the same time be available to add device.
Some examples:

  • More grey-shaded unit. The most obvious way to make it darker
  • Has special markup. Hatching?
  • Additional marker
@proudbro commented on GitHub (Apr 15, 2021): @jeremystretch , I don't suggest to consider such unit as occupied. I just want to see unit more visually differ somehow from others and at the same time be available to add device. Some examples: - More grey-shaded unit. The most obvious way to make it darker - Has special markup. Hatching? - Additional marker
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2021):

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 15, 2021): This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. NetBox is governed by a small group of core maintainers which means not all opened issues may receive direct feedback. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@fabricat commented on GitHub (Jul 9, 2021):

I agree with the proposal: from my point of view, this is exactly one of the few features missing in Netbox 😄

I think the best solution is in the middle:

  • showing half-occupied units (on the opposite side) as blank/free is misleading 👎
  • showing half-occupied units the same way as fully-occupied ones is misleading too 👎
  • using a third way (e.g. 50% opacity or a different texture) should work fine 👍

Details like device name or image can be omitted.
The aim is just to not confuse partly occupied units with free ones.

@fabricat commented on GitHub (Jul 9, 2021): I agree with the proposal: from my point of view, this is exactly one of the few features missing in Netbox 😄 I think the best solution is in the middle: - showing half-occupied units (on the opposite side) as blank/free is misleading 👎 - showing half-occupied units the same way as fully-occupied ones is misleading too 👎 - using a third way (e.g. 50% opacity or a different texture) should work fine 👍 Details like device name or image can be omitted. The aim is just to **not confuse partly occupied units** with free ones.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Aug 16, 2021):

Marking a device as "half-depth" implies that the peer unit on the opposite rack face is available for use

But only by another device which is also half-depth.

@candlerb commented on GitHub (Aug 16, 2021): > Marking a device as "half-depth" implies that the peer unit on the opposite rack face is available for use But only by another device which is also half-depth.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:20:15 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021):

I'm going to close this issue in favor of capturing the discussion under #6961, which seems to cover the same concerns but provides a bit more detail on a proposed modification.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 28, 2021): I'm going to close this issue in favor of capturing the discussion under #6961, which seems to cover the same concerns but provides a bit more detail on a proposed modification.
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 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#4763
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?