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

DCIM->Device: Add Manufacturer field to in single-device overview #6890

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 19:46:25 +01:00 by adam · 4 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:25 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @pwrgfi on GitHub (Aug 27, 2022).

Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub.

NetBox version

v3.3.1

Feature type

New functionality

Proposed functionality

The overview page for a single device, https://netbox/dcim/devices/1234/ , displays the "Device Type" attribute of the device, but not the manufacturer.

The Devices table on the other hand, https://netbox/dcim/devices/ displays both columns by default and next to each other, so it's only once you actually click on one of those devices that you get less detail rather than more, losing the manufacturer.

Likely an oversight to not have it included on the single Device overview, or would there be a reason against?

Please add the Manufacturer (right before the Device Type line).

Use case

We've got devices of several different manufacturers whose naming schema is surprisingly similar and displaying the model only leads to confusion that would be easily resolved with this simple change.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

No response

Originally created by @pwrgfi on GitHub (Aug 27, 2022). Originally assigned to: @arthanson on GitHub. ### NetBox version v3.3.1 ### Feature type New functionality ### Proposed functionality The overview page for a single device, https://netbox/dcim/devices/1234/ , displays the "Device Type" attribute of the device, but not the manufacturer. The Devices table on the other hand, https://netbox/dcim/devices/ displays both columns by default and next to each other, so it's only once you actually click on one of those devices that you get less detail rather than more, losing the manufacturer. Likely an oversight to not have it included on the single Device overview, or would there be a reason against? Please add the Manufacturer (right before the Device Type line). ### Use case We've got devices of several different manufacturers whose naming schema is surprisingly similar and displaying the model only leads to confusion that would be easily resolved with this simple change. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies _No response_
adam added the type: bugstatus: accepted labels 2025-12-29 19:46:25 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 19:46:25 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:25 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022):

IIRC the device type attribute previously displayed both the manufacturer name and model number, however we omitted the manufacturer from the DeviceType model's __str__() method some time back. We can add the manufacturer, but it should go on the same line as the device type model, as both are attributes of the assigned device type rather than the device itself.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022): IIRC the device type attribute previously displayed both the manufacturer name and model number, however we omitted the manufacturer from the DeviceType model's `__str__()` method some time back. We can add the manufacturer, but it should go on the same line as the device type model, as both are attributes of the assigned device type rather than the device itself.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@pwrgfi commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022):

OK, so I didn't remember it wrong and it had been there in the past.

Both attributes in the same line was my first intuition as well, so no opposition from me. Link the "manufacturer" part to the manufacturer entry, analogous to the current "device type" hyperlink?

@pwrgfi commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022): OK, so I didn't remember it wrong and it had been there in the past. Both attributes in the same line was my first intuition as well, so no opposition from me. Link the "manufacturer" part to the manufacturer entry, analogous to the current "device type" hyperlink?
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022):

Link the "manufacturer" part to the manufacturer entry, analogous to the current "device type" hyperlink?

IMO we should keep the single link to the device type, to avoid confusion.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 29, 2022): > Link the "manufacturer" part to the manufacturer entry, analogous to the current "device type" hyperlink? IMO we should keep the single link to the device type, to avoid confusion.
adam commented 2025-12-29 19:46:26 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2022):

Reclassifying this as a bug since omitting the manufacturer name was not intended behavior.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Aug 30, 2022): Reclassifying this as a bug since omitting the manufacturer name was not intended behavior.
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 status: accepted type: bug
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#6890
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?