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

Descending rack numbering & space calculation #526

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 16:22:53 +01:00 by adam · 3 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:22:53 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @j-boy on GitHub (Nov 10, 2016).

For version 1.7.0

When adding a device to a rack, the GUI says "The lowest-numbered unit occupied by the device" but it makes more sense for the user to enter the (physical) lowest position.
For racks with descending numbering, this will be the highest rack number, for racks with ascending numbering it will be the lowest rack number.
A little bit more complexity in the code for a more consistent user experience.

Originally created by @j-boy on GitHub (Nov 10, 2016). For version 1.7.0 When adding a device to a rack, the GUI says "The lowest-numbered unit occupied by the device" but it makes more sense for the user to enter the (physical) lowest position. For racks with descending numbering, this will be the highest rack number, for racks with ascending numbering it will be the lowest rack number. A little bit more complexity in the code for a more consistent user experience.
adam added the type: feature label 2025-12-29 16:22:53 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 16:22:53 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:22:54 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2016):

I don't see that it makes much difference to be honest, but I'm happy to keep this issue open if you're interested in submitting a pull request.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2016): I don't see that it makes much difference to be honest, but I'm happy to keep this issue open if you're interested in submitting a pull request.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:22:54 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@LBegnaud commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2016):

It doesn't matter to me either way, but I figured I'd chime in to remind whoever does the PR that converting a rack from one type to the other needs to have some extra logic to account for this if it does change.

@LBegnaud commented on GitHub (Nov 11, 2016): It doesn't matter to me either way, but I figured I'd chime in to remind whoever does the PR that converting a rack from one type to the other needs to have some extra logic to account for this if it does change.
adam commented 2025-12-29 16:22:54 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 15, 2016):

Closing due to lack of activity.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 15, 2016): Closing due to lack of activity.
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#526
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?