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

Improve handing of "pattern" fields during object creation #5810

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:33:00 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:33:00 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Dec 20, 2021).

Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub.

Proposed Changes

Improve the handling of fields which return a set of multiple values derived from a given pattern, i.e. ExpandableNameField and ExpandableIPAddressField. These are currently handled explicitly as an anti-pattern e.g. under ComponentCreateView.

I still need to do some research to determine our options, but I wanted to get this initiative documented.

Justification

The way these "expanded" fields are handled currently requires intervention within the view logic, and does not scale well to include additional implementations, such as the expansion of module bay positions under #7844.

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Dec 20, 2021). Originally assigned to: @jeremystretch on GitHub. ### Proposed Changes Improve the handling of fields which return a set of multiple values derived from a given pattern, i.e. ExpandableNameField and ExpandableIPAddressField. These are currently handled explicitly as an anti-pattern e.g. under ComponentCreateView. I still need to do some research to determine our options, but I wanted to get this initiative documented. ### Justification The way these "expanded" fields are handled currently requires intervention within the view logic, and does not scale well to include additional implementations, such as the expansion of module bay positions under #7844.
adam added the type: housekeeping label 2025-12-29 19:33:00 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:33:00 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:33:00 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

I ended up refactoring most of the device component creation logic under #7846. This is no longer needed.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 28, 2021): I ended up refactoring most of the device component creation logic under #7846. This is no longer needed.
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: housekeeping
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#5810
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?