This is definitely going to have to be thought about. Every one of this opinions have merit and everyone has something they can use out of it. I guess the biggest issue here is what is really going to work for the masses. Obviously, OTRS is working great for all of us because we continue to use it. We need to thank those people such as Martin and others who have taken the time to better our lives with this program.
The other part of this is, how do you work the ideas into a program without over complicating it? Think of the install and the setup issues we are going to run into when you start thinking about controlling otrs from email or a variation thereof. The biggest question out of all I guess is how do you prevent more than one person from working a ticket at a time and more importantly, how do you make sure a ticket is being taken care of? Gene -----Original Message----- From: Moshe Leibovitch (SoftLink) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, January 27, 2003 7:30 AM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: Re: [otrs] Integrating OTRS with e-mail more easily Hi, We are not trying to complicate things, just make them more effective. If you allow the "race" condition between two agents, you can also work with "reply" to the otrs user. The system will process the email as "agent response" and reject the second email. This is more reasonable (IMHO). It is also the easiest modification to the source. You can detect the agent by its email address, so it is really simple. Moshe --__--__-- Message: 3 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:00:04 +0100 From: Stefan Wintermeyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [otrs] Integrating OTRS with e-mail more easily Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hi Guys, On Mon, Jan 27, Gene Parks wrote: > I have been thinking about this on and off and maybe some of the > functions from Big Brothers mail interface can be of use here. I don't think that the LOCK e-mail as proposed by Moshe is a good idea. I think this is an unnessesary work overhead. I don't wanna send a LOCK e-mail each time I answer a ticket. Most people use the OTRS to handle large amounts of e-mails. So this is not a feasable idea (IMHO). But I see the point, so lets find a good solution. One could be to offer an IMAP port to the OTRS and to take the risk that two people waste the same amount of time to answer a single ticket. The system could dump the second answer to /dev/null because it is allready answered. So first come, first get. Of course this system has to set some default rules (e.g. an answered ticket would be a closed ticket). Or you could send basic commands by an X-Header. But guys, let's don't make things more complicated as nessesary. Many OTRS users don't have a clue what an X-Header is and we are proud that we can offer them a solution which is so easy that anybody can use it. But anyway IMAP could be a good idea. Do we have an IMAP guru here to implement an IMAP port? I don't think this port should be enabled by default, but it is indeed a nice feature for some people and it can be mixed with the standard HTML interface. take care Stefan -- Stefan Wintermeyer Don't say thing like that! Of course we'll see Master Luke again. He'll be quite all right, you'll see. (C3PO) "Star Wars (The Epire Strikes Back)" --__--__-- _______________________________________________ otrs mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs End of otrs Digest _______________________________________________ OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs _______________________________________________ OTRS mailing list: otrs - Webpage: http://otrs.org/ Archive: http://lists.otrs.org/pipermail/otrs To unsubscribe: http://lists.otrs.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/otrs
