Add type yaml for custom fields

[kikoshiro]

NetBox version

v4.3.2

Feature type

Other

Proposed functionality

Hello, when i create a new custom field, i have to select a "Type" and i can select JSON. Thats very nice but in fact, as i am a human, YAML would be much easy to write for me.

Is it possible to offer YAML too in the "Type" field?

Thank you so much in advance. NetBox is such a great Tool.

Cheers

Use case

Human Read/Write-Ability

Database changes

i dont konw

External dependencies

Not that i know

[jnovinger]

Thank you for your interest in extending NetBox. Unfortunately, the information you have provided does not constitute an actionable feature request. Per our contributing guide, a feature request must include a thorough description of the proposed functionality, including any database changes, new views or API endpoints, and so on. It must also include a detailed use case justifying its implementation. If you would like to elaborate on your proposal, please modify your post above. If sufficient detail is not added, this issue will be closed.

I know this is a bit of a form reply, but as is, we can't really do anything with this feature request without more details. Adding a YAML custom field type could introduce added complexity and some tricky challenges, including conflicting with the JSON custom field type's backing store (JSON in the DB) and converting to/from for display and edits.

[github-actions[bot]]

This is a reminder that additional information is needed in order to further triage this issue. If the requested details are not provided, the issue will soon be closed automatically.

[kikoshiro]

Hello thanks for your detailed reply, i tried the following to meet your requirements, how about this:

---

Proposed functionality

Introduce support for a YAML custom field type alongside the existing JSON type. This would allow users to input and view structured data in YAML format, which is often more human-readable and writable than JSON.

The YAML field would:

• Accept YAML input in the UI.
• Convert YAML to JSON for storage in the database (to maintain compatibility with the existing JSON backend).
• Convert JSON back to YAML for display and editing in the UI.
• This would be similar to how some configuration tools (e.g., Ansible, Kubernetes manifests) allow YAML input but operate on JSON internally.

Use case

Many users find YAML easier to read and write than JSON, especially for nested structures. For example, defining a list of dictionaries or hierarchical configuration is more concise and readable in YAML.

This feature would:

• Improve the user experience for non-developers or those less familiar with JSON syntax.
• Reduce syntax errors (e.g., missing commas or brackets).
• Align with tools and workflows that already use YAML.

Database changes

• No changes to the database schema are required. The YAML field would be stored as JSON in the database, just like the current JSON field type. The conversion between YAML and JSON would happen at the application layer.

External dependencies

• PyYAML or similar library for YAML parsing and validation.
• Optional: A YAML syntax highlighter for the UI (e.g., CodeMirror or Monaco editor with YAML support).

---

best regards

kiko

[jeremystretch]

Introduce support for a YAML custom field type alongside the existing JSON type.

Introducing a new type of custom field solely to effect a change in formatting would be unwarranted (not to mention technically infeasible). I suspect what you want instead is the option to read and write data to a JSON custom field in YAML format. Presumably this would be limited to changes within the web UI to support YAML data entry and formatting. We could leverage the existing "data format" user preference to default to either JSON or YAML. Does that sound right?

[kikoshiro]

Yes, that sounds Great to me — thank you!

Anything else i need to do here from now?

Best Regards