netbox_cable: Fix idempotency #990
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jof
force-pushed
the
jof/cables_idempotency
branch
from
726fcbb
to
c491c5e
Compare
sc68cal
approved these changes
May 8, 2023
rodvand
pushed a commit
to rodvand/ansible_modules
that referenced
this pull request
May 10, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #989
Related Issue
#989
New Behavior
netbox_cablemodule runs cleanly against Netbox v3.4.8 when pointing to a Rear Port, even after having already created the matching cable in a previous invocation of the module.Subsequent runs show no changes.
Contrast to Current Behavior
Currently, running
netbox_cableonce works fine attaching to a Rear Port once, but some canonicalization inside of the module seems to break with the name of the/dcim/rear-portsAPI endpoint on modern Netbox.Discussion: Benefits and Drawbacks
Benefit: the module works as intended
Drawback: I'm a relative newbie to these modules, and I'm not sure if my modifications of these data structures are proper.
Can I put kebab-case strings in there? Most seem to be snake_case?
Maybe something should be normalizing the endpoint name from kebab-case to snake_case in the representation of an existing cable termination before looking up in these structures?
Changes to the Documentation
None applicable; interfaces remain the same
Proposed Release Note Entry
Idempotency of Netbox Cables connected to Rear Ports works as expected
Double Check
develbranch.