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

Exclude limit_choices_to attribute from field deconstruction for migration planning #6870

New Issue
Open
opened 2025-12-29 19:46:14 +01:00 by adam · 1 comment
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:14 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Aug 24, 2022).

Proposed Changes

Extend our custom field deconstruction method to exclude a field's limit_choices_to attribute in addition to choices, help_text, and verbose_name (which are already excluded).

Justification

Changes to the limit_choices_to attribute on a field do not effect a database schema change. (In fact, we have many instances where the use of FeatureQuery() results in the dynamic calculation of acceptable values at runtime.) Excluding this attribute from consideration avoids creating "no-op" migrations which clutter the application.

Originally created by @jeremystretch on GitHub (Aug 24, 2022). ### Proposed Changes Extend our custom [field deconstruction method](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/c2c8bd0a761dde32bc2438abf6c05fd27fab58c3/netbox/utilities/management/commands/__init__.py#L20) to exclude a field's `limit_choices_to` attribute in addition to `choices`, `help_text`, and `verbose_name` (which are already excluded). ### Justification Changes to the `limit_choices_to` attribute on a field do not effect a database schema change. (In fact, we have many instances where the use of `FeatureQuery()` results in the dynamic calculation of acceptable values at runtime.) Excluding this attribute from consideration avoids creating "no-op" migrations which clutter the application.
adam added the type: housekeepingnetboxstatus: backlog labels 2025-12-29 19:46:14 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:14 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

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

We can actually ignore related_name and related_query_name as well, and simply bypass RelatedField's deconstruct() method entirely. We'll need to do some extensive testing before implementing this change, however.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 24, 2022): We can actually ignore `related_name` and `related_query_name` as well, and simply bypass RelatedField's `deconstruct()` method entirely. We'll need to do some extensive testing before implementing this change, however.
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 netbox status: backlog 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#6870
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?