Custom field multiple selection

[TomGrozev]

Environment

• Python version: 3.8.6
• NetBox version: 2.10

Proposed Functionality

The ability to be able to select multiple values in custom fields of type "Selection". This is similar to how tags work but the ability to do it for custom selection fields. A new option to allow multiple options to be selected for custom selection fields would be added and using the Django multiple selection form, this can be added.

Use Case

We use ansible to deploy configurations and NetBox as the source of truth. We need to be able to select multiple applications for a virtual machine and then ansible can use that to deploy the application. In order to do this and install multiple applications, we need to be able to select multiple values from a custom field of type "Selection".

Database Changes

A new multiple selection field would be added to the custom field model. Since the changes in version 2.10
store custom field data as JSON, storing a list of values is simple.

External Dependencies

None

[jeremystretch]

With the move to JSON-based custom field data in v2.10, this is now a possibility.

[hyudra]

Is it possible to add custom field with JSON / List type? Sometimes our data do not have fixed length data (such as VM with multiple disks).

[TomGrozev]

@hyudra In order for multiple fields to be selected, the natural solution is for the items to be stored as a list in JSON.

[schmitmd]

I've got the same use case as TomGrozev. Using Netbox as a dynamic Ansible inventory via the Netbox Ansible collection. It looks like #5440 / #5459 were closed as rejected though. Is someone going to re-implement this functionality differently for the 2.11 milestone or are those PRs actually valid & intended to be pulled in, or...?

[fabi125]

Is it possible to add custom field with JSON / List type? Sometimes our data do not have fixed length data (such as VM with multiple disks).

Having a custom field that can store multiple values (not necessarily from a selection) would be great. Can this FR be expanded to include that or should I open a separate issue?