starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-13 13:53:31 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Make device description a clickable link #9596

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 21:19:28 +01:00 by adam · 6 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:28 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @llamafilm on GitHub (May 7, 2024).

NetBox version

v3.7.3

Feature type

Change to existing functionality

Proposed functionality

When viewing the /dcim/devices webpage, I would like an option to make the Description field a hyperlink to the device page, just like the ID and Name columns behave now.

Implementation details are open for discussion. It could be always on, or a configuration.py parameter, or a user preference.

Use case

We don't use the Name field at all because the uniqueness constraints don't work for our use case. All of our devices are "unnamed", so I like to hide that column while browsing the UI. For now, I'm keeping the ID column visible so I can click the link to the device. I would prefer to hide that column and click on the Description instead, because the ID number is meaningless for most users, and it's also requires more mouse precision to click the smaller link area.

Current view:
image

Desired change:
image

This might be an edge case, but it would help a lot for usability in our situation and I hope it would be trivial to implement.

Database changes

No response

External dependencies

none

Originally created by @llamafilm on GitHub (May 7, 2024). ### NetBox version v3.7.3 ### Feature type Change to existing functionality ### Proposed functionality When viewing the `/dcim/devices` webpage, I would like an option to make the `Description` field a hyperlink to the device page, just like the `ID` and `Name` columns behave now. Implementation details are open for discussion. It could be always on, or a configuration.py parameter, or a user preference. ### Use case We don't use the `Name` field at all because the uniqueness constraints don't work for our use case. All of our devices are "unnamed", so I like to hide that column while browsing the UI. For now, I'm keeping the `ID` column visible so I can click the link to the device. I would prefer to hide that column and click on the `Description` instead, because the ID number is meaningless for most users, and it's also requires more mouse precision to click the smaller link area. Current view: ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/3991046/05d04683-eb4a-42e4-bc1d-6139c3aa94d5) Desired change: ![image](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/assets/3991046/4f08e9e5-536d-48c4-ac1e-f909d233e16d) This might be an edge case, but it would help a lot for usability in our situation and I hope it would be trivial to implement. ### Database changes _No response_ ### External dependencies none
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 21:19:28 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeffgdotorg commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024):

Good FR, thanks for writing it up.

@jeffgdotorg commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024): Good FR, thanks for writing it up.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Julio-Oliveira-Encora commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024):

Could you please assign it to me?

@Julio-Oliveira-Encora commented on GitHub (May 7, 2024): Could you please assign it to me?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:29 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 13, 2024):

I'm afraid the proposed change isn't tenable, for two reasons.

First, the description field is not intended to be used in this manner: It is meant to capture a brief bit of free-form text, and linking this text in most cases would be unnatural and confusing.

Second, most objects in NetBox have a description field, and linkifying only this one would be inconsistent with the others.

Maybe you could expand on why you're not using the name field for devices?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (May 13, 2024): I'm afraid the proposed change isn't tenable, for two reasons. First, the description field is not intended to be used in this manner: It is meant to capture a brief bit of free-form text, and linking this text in most cases would be unnatural and confusing. Second, most objects in NetBox have a description field, and linkifying only this one would be inconsistent with the others. Maybe you could expand on why you're not using the name field for devices?
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@llamafilm commented on GitHub (May 16, 2024):

Our devices do not have unique names. For example, at one site I might have 100 devices called “AVR”. Within the context of a room (Location), this makes sense and is the easiest way for our technicians to refer to a device. When I need a unique identifier, I use the Device ID.

When I first started using Netbox, I tried to think of a naming convention to ensure uniqueness, but the only way to do that is to append information that’s already present in other fields, which makes it harder to read and more prone to mistakes. So I used the Description field as a “human friendly” label in the Netbox UI and as a label in Prometheus/Grafana, which is fed by Netbox.
Then I realized it’s possible to leave all devices unnamed which works great, except for this issue.

Another option is to relax the requirement for unique names per site, but I think that has already been shot down before.

@llamafilm commented on GitHub (May 16, 2024): Our devices do not have unique names. For example, at one site I might have 100 devices called “AVR”. Within the context of a room (Location), this makes sense and is the easiest way for our technicians to refer to a device. When I need a unique identifier, I use the Device ID. When I first started using Netbox, I tried to think of a naming convention to ensure uniqueness, but the only way to do that is to append information that’s already present in other fields, which makes it harder to read and more prone to mistakes. So I used the Description field as a “human friendly” label in the Netbox UI and as a label in Prometheus/Grafana, which is fed by Netbox. Then I realized it’s possible to leave all devices unnamed which works great, except for this issue. Another option is to relax the requirement for unique names per site, but I think that has already been shot down before.
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 20, 2024):

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. Do not attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our contributing guide.

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Aug 20, 2024): 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. **Do not** attempt to circumvent this process by "bumping" the issue; doing so will result in its immediate closure and you may be barred from participating in any future discussions. Please see our [contributing guide](https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/blob/develop/CONTRIBUTING.md).
adam commented 2025-12-29 21:19:30 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@github-actions[bot] commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2024):

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 (Sep 19, 2024): 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 complexity: low pending closure status: under review topic: UI/UX 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#9596
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?