Dear Jim, ok, I understand you point in terms of “modifications outside the admin interface” and the “state machine” and “conditions” which are indeed very helpful utilities and used for directed notifications, right!
So, in this case, I would recommend that you setup a Change with just one (1) WorkOrder and save this as a Change Template. This way your users can create a Change just from a Template and don’t carry about Change, WorkOrder, Condition, etc ... You might want to remove the ability to “delete” and “modify” WorkOrders then for people in the itsm-change-builder groups. This can be configured in SysConfig -> ChangeManagement -> Frontent::Agent::ModuleRegistration ... if I am not mistaken... Search for “involved” or “report” to find the relevant SysConfig section ... Keep in mind there are six main activities, which jointly form the basics of the change management process. They are: 1. Identify potential change 2. Analyze change request 3. Evaluate change 4. Plan change 5. Implement change 6. Review and close change These activities are executed by four different roles. Activity 1 and 2 is handeled within a RfC record. Cheers, Nils On 02.03.2011, at 17:34, James Burk wrote: > Thanks again Nils for the quick response. First, I have no expertise in > writing ACLs. If you could point me to some documentation I might be able to > figure something out but I am trying to limit any modifications to what can > be accomplished through the admin interface. Second, the state transition > and related notifications is an excellent way to manage the change record's > workflow. I cannot do that through the ticket engine, as far as I know, > given my first point above. I enabled workorders this morning and created a > change then added a workorder. I am presented with an almost identical > screen to enter additional/identical data. This step is unnecessary for most > of the changes we do here. But the workorders do allow me to link my > service, and add some date fields which aren't available at the change record > level It would be nice to be able to do this at the change record level But > again workorders add a layer of complexity to my process that will cause my > folks to mutiny if I deployed the system as such. I'll keep looking. — Nils Leideck http://webint.cryptonode.de / a Fractal project --------------------------------------------------------------------- OTRS mailing list: itsm - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/itsm To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/mailman/listinfo/itsm
