Kevin Falcone ha scritto: > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:56:17PM +0000, Guadagnino Cristiano wrote: >> The problem arises when one requestor (requestors often are completely >> unaware of the fact we are using RT internally) send a ticket to a >> division, and that division replies that the request should be made to >> another division. At this point, the requestor often takes the reply and >> forwards it to the other division, leaving it intact. >> Now, if the other division is using RT, the mail message from the >> requestor is again turned into a ticket and - due to the fact that it >> already contains a ticket number - it is appended to the old ticket >> thread instead of creating a new ticket in the other division's queues. >> >> Is anybody having this issue? How did you solve it? > While we understand this use case (and in fact have developed code for > users who needed to be able to email other RT queues from inside RT): Kevin, I am curious about this. Is this something you have developed under a paid contract or is it part of the standard RT? If so, I may have missed something.
>> Ideally I think RT should append to the original ticket only if the >> receiving address is the same as the original ticket. Or at least, this >> is how it could work in our environment. Anybody foreseeing possible >> problems with this approach? > This workflow will never become the default RT workflow. Too many > people (including us) rely on email finding their way to an RT ticket > regardless of whether they've moved to a separate escalation queue or > just to the 'correct' queue. > > Also consider the many many people who have 5+ email addresses all > feed into one queue. > > Assuming usage of a modern RT, the following extension forces creation > of new tickets when a reply comes in to a resolved ticket. You could > either use it as is, or modify it to check To: (and Cc:) vs Queue's > correspond address and then trigger the new ticket creation. > > https://metacpan.org/release/RT-Extension-RepliesToResolved > > -kevin > Thank you Kevin, I think I'll be perusing this extension. BTW, we're using RT 4.2.3. Bye Cris -- RT Training - Boston, September 9-10 http://bestpractical.com/training