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

User/Asset Merge Feature Request #7669

Open
Oscillometer opened this issue Dec 16, 2019 · 10 comments
Open

User/Asset Merge Feature Request #7669

Oscillometer opened this issue Dec 16, 2019 · 10 comments
Labels
❤️ feature request 👩‍💻 ready for dev These issues are ready for someone to work on them - take your pick!

Comments

@Oscillometer
Copy link

Server (please complete the following information):

  • Snipe-IT Version v4.8.0 - build 4186 (master)
  • OS: Snipe-IT Hosted
  • Web Server: Snipe-IT Hosted
  • PHP Version: 7.1.33

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I was dropped into managing a very poorly setup Snipe-IT instance. There were hundreds of duplicate assets, users, and locations. Several other asset systems I previously worked in allowed merging of assets or users to correct duplications. Currently working with support to try and mass manipulate the database to consolidate my users as manually editing them would take months.

Describe the solution you'd like
The option to initiate a merge of users, and if possible assets, together. It would be located in the bulk action drop down menu where "Bulk Checkin & Delete" is located.

It would work as follows:
Select multiple users/assets
Select "Merge" from the dropdown menu
You are brought to a corresponding /users/merge or /hardware/merge
The selected users/assets would display on the screen with radio buttons next to each item, to indicate the "master" user/asset
A button to submit the merge would be in the bottom right of the screen.

Use Case:
If userA, for instance, was missing the phone number. While userB had a phone number merged into userA then userA would now contain userB's phone number. If the reverse was done, A>B instead of B>A, then the phone number would stay the same.

All history info would be merged together, with an extra line indicating there was a merge of x users/assets that occured.

The best situation, to prevent data loss, would be to clone the master user/asset. Consolidate the info into this new user/asset then move the old users/assets and the old master to the corresponding deleted assets/users table. This way the original assets and users are unaltered in the deleted users/assets table. The new merged user would have a new ID number vs the original user/asset that was merged together.

If a bad merge did occur one could just restore the old users/assets then delete the new consolidated item without data loss.

This is a rather powerful feature, and as such should be limited to admins or its own permission group if possible.

Describe alternatives you've considered
The only alternative that is possible would be attempting to manually merge users/assets, which is highly time consuming.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Feb 14, 2020

Is this still relevant? We haven't heard from anyone in a bit. If so, please comment with any updates or additional detail.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Don't take it personally, we just need to keep a handle on things. Thank you for your contributions!

@stale stale bot added the stale label Feb 14, 2020
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Feb 22, 2020

This issue has been automatically closed because it has not had recent activity. If you believe this is still an issue, please confirm that this issue is still happening in the most recent version of Snipe-IT and reply to this thread to re-open it.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Feb 22, 2020
@dbTunder
Copy link

dbTunder commented Mar 5, 2021

I am facing now a situationin which I have to merge 2 databases and this is still relevant.

@ruddens
Copy link

ruddens commented Oct 19, 2021

Yes please this would be a nice feature still.

@mmartinescu
Copy link

May we please re-open this feature request? It would be really useful feature to have.

@snipe snipe added ❤️ feature request 👩‍💻 ready for dev These issues are ready for someone to work on them - take your pick! labels Feb 16, 2022
@snipe snipe reopened this Feb 16, 2022
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Feb 16, 2022

Okay, it looks like this issue or feature request might still be important. We'll re-open it for now. Thank you for letting us know!

@stale stale bot removed the stale label Feb 16, 2022
@uberbrady
Copy link
Collaborator

We have some of what we'd need to do this in the existing merge-users Artisan script - if we could refactor that stuff out, and make it available in other places, that probably ought to at least help.

@snipe
Copy link
Owner

snipe commented Feb 16, 2022

Hm, I don't think the artisan merge script would be re-usable here - they're kind of serving different purposes.

@stoz
Copy link

stoz commented Apr 21, 2022

FYI I've just come across the same situation, wanting to merge an asset to preserve the history. It's still a relevant feature. Thanks.

@Krejar
Copy link

Krejar commented Jul 8, 2022

This is very relevant for us. Not only to preserve the history, but to also merge laptops, for example, which can theoretically have more than 1 MAC address.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
❤️ feature request 👩‍💻 ready for dev These issues are ready for someone to work on them - take your pick!
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

8 participants