Module Type Image Filename Format

[NeverBehave]

Related: #3763

Right now, module type images have different filename format. E.g.

• https://github.com/netbox-community/devicetype-library/blob/master/module-images/Dell
• https://github.com/netbox-community/devicetype-library/tree/master/module-images/Panduit

Is there any standard around it?

---

If not, I have a simple proposal: Create a folder for each of the module: module-images/<manufacture>/<module-type-yaml-filename>/*.<ext>

E.g. module-images/Dell/4V8KD/1.png

We could optionally looking for front.<ext> and rear.<ext>. However since netbox does not have specific fields for them, and current data does have multiple images for single module and might not fit in the front/rear criteria.

[walday]

Hi! How can there be a photo of the back side if the modules are plugged into the equipment through it?

[NeverBehave]

@walday

The front and rear images are optional. For the power module, having the rear is logical but the front is also viable. Use whichever image name makes the most sense for the module.

My main concern right now is how to identify images of the same modules.

[NeverBehave]

@harryajc I would also like some input from you here since you are the active maintainer for this repo. Is it something worth looking/accepted into?

[walday]

@walday

The front and rear images are optional. For the power module, having the rear is logical but the front is also viable. Use whichever image name makes the most sense for the module.

My main concern right now is how to identify images of the same modules.

In my opinion, module images are useless - they do not have anchor points for display on diagrams and are only visible when displaying the module type

[NeverBehave]

@walday makes sense. With that being said:

1. How do we deal with existing images in repo?
2. How are we handling new contributions to module images?

[harryajc]

I think the main reason that there is no info around the module images is because they don't actually import using the script so that probably needs fixing but I would say 1 image per module is probably enough, maybe just using the module-slug.png similar to how device images are stored

[NeverBehave]

@harryajc we then need to pick one image for modules that have multiple images. What would be a good standard for these module images?

Also, here is an example I believe multiple(2+) images might be useful:

https://github.com/netbox-community/devicetype-library/blob/master/module-images/Panduit/panduit-fct-7za.rear.png
https://github.com/netbox-community/devicetype-library/blob/master/module-images/Panduit/panduit-fct-7za.front.png

Maybe we can still categorize image as front and rear, or for now, since Netbox is okay with multiple images, put them in folder, use filename as description so at least they can be uploaded properly(?)

[NeverBehave]

I think I would just create an experimental PR just to give a look how it would be like under this proposal if time allowed.

[harryajc]

Hi @NeverBehave
Yeah maybe limit it to 2 images just to stop people adding dozens of images for a specific module and yeah happy to review a PR for that

[NeverBehave]

just a quick update that I run into some errands and don't have much progress here. If anyone interested in PR feel free to do so.

[marcinpsk]

I've put 'some' reorganization into those images - there's several (mainly Panduit) that - based on file names, don't really have any type definitions.
I've updated my fork of script to work with it (plus fixed front/rear port mappings broken by change in 4.5) (https://github.com/marcinpsk/Device-Type-Library-Import)