Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Role or Type to models where it make sense #5

Closed
dgarros opened this issue Nov 2, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

Add Role or Type to models where it make sense #5

dgarros opened this issue Nov 2, 2021 · 6 comments
Labels
roadmap: near term status: accepted This issue has been accepted by the maintainers team for implementation type: enhancement type: technical debt

Comments

@dgarros
Copy link

dgarros commented Nov 2, 2021

Environment

  • Nautobot version: 1.1.4
  • nautobot-plugin-firewall-model version: 0.1.0

Proposed Functionality

I think having Role and/or Type on as many objects as possible would be very useful
Of course it's not applicable to all of them

Use Case

Being able to track the Role or the Type of a given object is a key part of the Source of Truth and it very helpful when we need to automate that resource.

@whitej6
Copy link
Contributor

whitej6 commented Nov 8, 2021

Thinking of ipam:Role? I like the idea, kinda think ipam:Role should be extras:Role instead for an appropriate place.

@whitej6 whitej6 added question Further information is requested type: enhancement status: action required This issue requires additional information to be actionable labels Nov 8, 2021
@dgarros
Copy link
Author

dgarros commented Nov 8, 2021

Yes until we have something better : either we can use ipam:role or we should consider adding a new role model as part of the plugin. Recently, we went with option 2 for another plugin but both have pro and cons

I agree we should have a generic extras:role model, similar to extras:status in core, it's being tracked as part of the Core Data Model Epic > nautobot/nautobot#768
I don't think we have a dedicated issue for it right now.

@whitej6
Copy link
Contributor

whitej6 commented Nov 8, 2021

I would vote option 2 with the desire to move to extras:role when it is added to core.

@whitej6
Copy link
Contributor

whitej6 commented Nov 8, 2021

It could just be a subclass of ipam:role to be able to avoid confusion on having to assign an ipam role that's used in a service definition.

@dgarros
Copy link
Author

dgarros commented Nov 8, 2021

I would vote option 2 with the desire to move to extras:role when it is added to core.

Sounds good to me,
FYI, I opened a new issue in core to track that nautobot/nautobot#1063

@whitej6 whitej6 added status: accepted This issue has been accepted by the maintainers team for implementation type: technical debt and removed question Further information is requested status: action required This issue requires additional information to be actionable labels Nov 12, 2021
@whitej6
Copy link
Contributor

whitej6 commented Nov 12, 2021

Accepted as a duplicated model with desire to go to extras:role

whitej6 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 2, 2021
@whitej6 whitej6 closed this as completed in 89f5fcb Dec 2, 2021
whitej6 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 2, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
roadmap: near term status: accepted This issue has been accepted by the maintainers team for implementation type: enhancement type: technical debt
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants