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

Object edit/add GUI does not show some custom fields in a custom field section #5994

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00 by adam · 7 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @ryanmerolle on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022).

NetBox version

v3.1.6

Python version

3.9

Steps to Reproduce

Unlikely most models, there are a few models that do not show custom fields in their own section within the GUI. Specifically this is referring to the add and edit views for an object. Viewing such an object in in the GUI shows said field in a separate table referenced as Custom Fields.

1.) Create a new custom field for RIR
2.) Edit an existing RIR https://demo.netbox.dev/ipam/rirs/1/edit/
3.) View the existing RIR https://demo.netbox.dev/ipam/rirs/1/

Compared to other objects, RIRs group all custom fields in a section called custom fields in BOTH the add/edit and the view object pages. At least with RIRs, the add/edit object page does not place custom fields in their own section.

Expected Behavior

I would expect all add/edit forms to behave the same.

Observed Behavior

At least with RIRs, the add/edit forms do not organize custom fields the same.

Originally created by @ryanmerolle on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022). ### NetBox version v3.1.6 ### Python version 3.9 ### Steps to Reproduce Unlikely most models, there are a few models that do not show custom fields in their own section within the GUI. Specifically this is referring to the add and edit views for an object. Viewing such an object in in the GUI shows said field in a separate table referenced as Custom Fields. 1.) Create a new custom field for RIR 2.) Edit an existing RIR https://demo.netbox.dev/ipam/rirs/1/edit/ 3.) View the existing RIR https://demo.netbox.dev/ipam/rirs/1/ Compared to other objects, RIRs group all custom fields in a section called custom fields in BOTH [the add/edit](https://demo.netbox.dev/tenancy/tenants/1/edit/) and [the view ](https://demo.netbox.dev/tenancy/tenants/1/)object pages. At least with RIRs, the add/edit object page does not place custom fields in their own section. ### Expected Behavior I would expect all add/edit forms to behave the same. ### Observed Behavior At least with RIRs, the add/edit forms do not organize custom fields the same.
adam added the type: featurestatus: needs ownerpending closure labels 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022):

there are a few models that do not show custom fields in their own section within the GUI.

This is intentional. For models with very few built-in fields (e.g. RIRs), there was no need to break out custom fields into their own section. You can see in the template that only forms with fieldsets explicitly defined are rendered with separate sections.

Happy to leave this open for discussion but I'm going to reclassify it as a feature request.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022): > there are a few models that do not show custom fields in their own section within the GUI. This is intentional. For models with very few built-in fields (e.g. RIRs), there was no need to break out custom fields into their own section. You can see in [the template](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/netbox/templates/generic/object_edit.html) that only forms with fieldsets explicitly defined are rendered with separate sections. Happy to leave this open for discussion but I'm going to reclassify it as a feature request.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:28 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ryanmerolle commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022):

Totally fair. I was debating whether it was intentional or not. I was on a consistency kick. I am likely overthinking it all.

@ryanmerolle commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2022): Totally fair. I was debating whether it was intentional or not. I was on a consistency kick. I am likely overthinking it all.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jan 26, 2022):

Also: With the move to Django 4.0 in v3.2, we'll have some more flexibility around how forms are rendered. So we should probably take a fresh look at the current approach in general.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Jan 26, 2022): Also: With the move to Django 4.0 in v3.2, we'll have some more flexibility around how forms are rendered. So we should probably take a fresh look at the current approach in general.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Mar 28, 2022):

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 (Mar 28, 2022): 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 19:35:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2022):

Reconsidering this, it is probably best to always break out custom fields into their own section to help combat potential confusion.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Apr 6, 2022): Reconsidering this, it is probably best to always break out custom fields into their own section to help combat potential confusion.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:35:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jun 6, 2022):

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 6, 2022): 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 19:35:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2022):

This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Jul 6, 2022): This issue has been automatically closed due to lack of activity. In an effort to reduce noise, please do not comment any further. Note that the core maintainers may elect to reopen this issue at a later date if deemed necessary.
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 pending closure status: needs owner 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#5994
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?