[rt-users] ticket links all pointing to localhost
HI This has been happening just since this morning. When i add a link - parent/child/referred etc the link appears fine. but when i click-through, the url of the page is pointing to localhost e.g. http://localhost/Ticket/Display.html?id=166 Anyone have any idea how i can fix this un? Cheers, -- Calvin Chiang Network Admin Utilyx 1st Floor, 55 North Wharf Road Paddington London, W2 1LA Tel: 020 7087 8673 www.utilyx.com __ Utilyx is the trading name of Utilyx Limited and Utilyx Risk Management Limited (URML). URML is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of Utilyx. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Utilyx. Unless otherwise stated, any pricing information given in this message is indicative only and does not constitute an offer to deal at any price quoted. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] RT 3.8.2 - Logo image in message templates
Hi, Is there a wat of having a logo image in a reply template? TIA, Filipe Clemente Portugal ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] BUG: has StealTicket but gets You can only take tickets which are unowned?
I think you're missing the point though. If you don't allow Stealticket then this wouldn't matter. The only question is if they can Steal the ticket, why force them to take duplicate steps ? I don't understand why you don't want more control for Bulk Update. So any of your users can cause every one of your ticket requestors to get a blank message ... and this is good how? The point here is to allow each organization to work how they like best. Don't take away StealTicket just because you don't allow it. Just don't assign the right. On Mar 4, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Kenneth Crocker wrote: I agree with Jesse. Although it is a pain in the rump to have to go thru 2 steps to re-assign a ticket, I am of the mind that when you lossen the the reins of ownership (and for that matter let too many users have the ModifyTicket right.) you run the risk of owners undoing each others work. We allow only 2 users to have the ModifyTicket right, Owners and the AdminCc (which for us is the Queue Manager). We only allow the Queue manager to have the StealTicket right. The reason is that for us, tight control of tickets and the work on them is critical. We just can't allow users the ability to point at one another and say he did it. Obviously, there are MANY RT installations that are smaller and need WAY less control. However, I would prefer that we have a choice of degree for control, like in the RT_SiteConfig, rather than just opening it all up OR removing such features as Bulk Update, which I use a lot when setting up new queues or when a queue needs to do a mass change to a CF or something. just a thought. Kenn LBNL On 3/4/2009 11:33 AM, Jesse Vincent wrote: On Wed 4.Mar'09 at 11:29:38 -0800, Jo Rhett wrote: Reading the code in Ticket_Overlay around line 2730-2750 it would appear that this is deliberate. For someone to reassign a ticket to someone else on their reply, they must be the current owner. For me to take it back and close it, I need to separately Steal it, then Resolve it. Would you accept a patch that allows implicit Steal like this? Nope. That would entirely defeat ownership-as-locking. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] closing out spam tickets - button - queue
On Thursday 08 January 2009 16:02:28 Jerrad Pierce wrote: hmm. okay. I don't know how to do bulk updates, I guess I can learn. So far we get two spams/day into the ticket system, so it hasn't been that big a deal yet. It's just a link at the top of any search results page. I don't know if this helps, but I think what Jerrad means is: 1. Look at the search results page (with Search/Results.html in the url). 2. Click the Bulk Update link in the menu at the top of the page. 3. Select the appropriate (spam queue) entry from the Make queue popup. 4. Click the Update button. Voila. -- Richard Foley Ciao - shorter than aufwiedersehen http://www.rfi.net/ ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Little help with template
Hi,
I should state I have no knowledge of Perl beforehand. I have a scrip
that notifies the requestor when an approval ticket has been approved.
This is the template;
Subject: Ticket Approved: {$Ticket-Subject}
Greetings,
Your ticket has been approved by { eval { $Approval-OwnerObj-Name } }.
Other approvals may be pending.
The requestor receives the email as shown below;
Greetings,
Your ticket has been approved by .
Other approvals may be pending.
Notice the distinct lack of the approver's name.
Thnaks
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] WorkflowBuilderRules, approval on either approver
Hi Michael,
Yes, I have tried that too, but oddly, it didn't work. I re-ran the
rt-workflow to update the rule, and even restarted apache, but I could
not notice any difference in behavior.
Thanks.
fred
Michael Finn wrote:
I haven't tried the plugin yet, but based on the docs
(http://search.cpan.org/dist/RTx-WorkflowBuilder/bin/rt-workflow), I'd
guess you need something like:
Set($WorkflowBuilderRules,
{ 'CMR-approval-rule' = ['CMR-approval' = ['IT Manager approval',
'IT Director approval'] ] } );
Hope that works/helps.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:rt-users-
boun...@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Fred Blaise
Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:32 AM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: [rt-users] WorkflowBuilderRules, approval on either approver
Hi all,
I have a very simple need for approval. Either my manager or my
director
approval should suffice.
I have it this way currently:
Set($WorkflowBuilderRules,
{ 'CMR-approval' = [ 'IT Manager approval', 'IT Director
approval'], }
);
But it still requires the 2 of them to approve for the pending
approval status to vanish. I have also tried with another pair of
angled brackets, but still no luck.
How would I go about doing that?
Thanks for the help.
fred
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] WorkflowBuilderRules, approval on either approver
Hi Ruslan,
yea, tried that too... :/
Ruslan Zakirov wrote:
Clkao may have comments.
However as far as I can see it should be:
Set($WorkflowBuilderRules,
{ 'CMR-approval' = [ [ 'IT Manager approval', 'IT Director approval'] ],
}
);
One stage with multiple approvers.
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Fred Blaise fr...@modernp.com wrote:
Hi all,
I have a very simple need for approval. Either my manager or my director
approval should suffice.
I have it this way currently:
Set($WorkflowBuilderRules,
{ 'CMR-approval' = [ 'IT Manager approval', 'IT Director approval'], }
);
But it still requires the 2 of them to approve for the pending
approval status to vanish. I have also tried with another pair of
angled brackets, but still no luck.
How would I go about doing that?
Thanks for the help.
fred
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is it standard for AdminCc watchers to get 2 emails every time a ticket is created?
On Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:43:52 -0500, Steve O'Brien steve.obr...@hdesd.org wrote: What Scrip is causing this to occur? How can you tell? Steve Steve, can you list your scrips, both global and for the queue in question? Are your adminccs seeing this behavior for every single new ticket or just ones they generate themselves? Steve -- Stephen Turner Senior Programmer/Analyst - SAIS MIT IST ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Little help with template
Is the ticket owner supposed to be the approver?
In that case use {eva{$self-OwnerObj-Name}}
-Ashishl
From: rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com
[rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Jim Tambling
[jim.tambl...@datatote.co.uk]
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 6:13 PM
To: rt-us...@bestpractical.com
Subject: [rt-users] Little help with template
Hi,
I should state I have no knowledge of Perl beforehand. I have a scrip that
notifies the requestor when an approval ticket has been approved. This is the
template;
Subject: Ticket Approved: {$Ticket-Subject}
Greetings,
Your ticket has been approved by { eval { $Approval-OwnerObj-Name } }.
Other approvals may be pending.
The requestor receives the email as shown below;
Greetings,
Your ticket has been approved by .
Other approvals may be pending.
Notice the distinct lack of the approver's name.
Thnaks
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is there a mailing list for AT?
Not i know of, was searching for it as well. As I am a newbie to RT and AT, i am keen to learn more about AT too, so i created a yahoo group. You can find it here: at-user-subscr...@yahoogroups.de Dont worry about the TLD; main conversation language is english :-) Of course it is still empty, because it was just created, but i invite everybody to participate. I hope i didn't break any mailing list/forum rule, if so, please let me know. Best w_e -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22354476.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Scrip and custom field Help
I've googled and either my google fu is not working or I'm not finding the correct answer, and I barely know perl. Using RT 3.8.1 on freebsd using mysql Condition: On Resolve Action: is where I need help. I have a custom field named TicketStatus. I want to on resolve set the custom field to be Closed [Orbit], usually the ticket status is either Created [Orbit] or Updated [Orbit]. any pointers that you can give me would be great, either by telling me what to search for or giving me an idea of what to use to get the action done. -- Thanks in advance Chris Newcomb ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is there a mailing list for AT?
The list has been down for a while and I don't have time to maintain it. The code is hosted by Google. I fully support anyone who wants to run a list. On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 10:59 AM, who else bogey...@yahoo.com wrote: Not i know of, was searching for it as well. As I am a newbie to RT and AT, i am keen to learn more about AT too, so i created a yahoo group. You can find it here: at-user-subscr...@yahoogroups.de Dont worry about the TLD; main conversation language is english :-) Of course it is still empty, because it was just created, but i invite everybody to participate. I hope i didn't break any mailing list/forum rule, if so, please let me know. Best w_e -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22354476.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Scrip and custom field Help
Hi Chris, Try this: Condition : On resolve Custom Action Preparation Code : # set the CF Work-Completed Date my $trans = $self-TransactionObj; my $ticket = $self-TicketObj; my $cf_obj = RT::CustomField-new($RT::SystemUser); my $cf_name = TicketStatus; my $cf_value = Closed [Orbit]; $cf_obj-LoadByName(Name=$cf_name); $RT::Logger-debug(Loaded\$cf_obj-Name = . $cf_obj-Name() .\n); $ticket-AddCustomFieldValue(Field=$cf_obj, Value=$cf_value, RecordTransaction=0); return 1; Custom cleanup code : return 1; -Ashish From: rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com [rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Chris Newcomb [ch...@eaglehawkonline.com] Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 9:42 PM To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com Subject: [rt-users] Scrip and custom field Help I've googled and either my google fu is not working or I'm not finding the correct answer, and I barely know perl. Using RT 3.8.1 on freebsd using mysql Condition: On Resolve Action: is where I need help. I have a custom field named TicketStatus. I want to on resolve set the custom field to be Closed [Orbit], usually the ticket status is either Created [Orbit] or Updated [Orbit]. any pointers that you can give me would be great, either by telling me what to search for or giving me an idea of what to use to get the action done. -- Thanks in advance Chris Newcomb ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is it standard for AdminCc watchers to get 2 emails every time a ticket is created?
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 06:08 -0800, Stephen Turner wrote: Steve, can you list your scrips, both global and for the queue in question? Are your adminccs seeing this behavior for every single new ticket or just ones they generate themselves? Every ticket and we are only doing global scrips. Here they are: 8 On Comment Notify AdminCcs as Comment TransactionCreate On Comment Notify AdminCcs as Comment Admin Comment 9 On Comment Notify Other Recipients as Comment TransactionCreate On Comment Notify Other Recipients as Comment Correspondence 5 On Correspond Notify AdminCcs TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify AdminCcs Admin Correspondence 7 On Correspond Notify Other Recipients TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify Other Recipients Correspondence 6 On Correspond Notify Requestors and Ccs TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify Requestors and Ccs Correspondence 1 On Correspond Open Tickets TransactionCreate On Correspond Open Tickets Blank 3 On Create Autoreply To Requestors TransactionCreate On Create Autoreply To Requestors Autoreply - HDESD 4 On Create Notify AdminCcs TransactionCreate On Create Notify AdminCcs Transaction 2 On Owner Change Notify Owner TransactionCreate On Owner Change Notify Owner Transaction 16 On Queue Change Notify AdminCc TransactionCreate On Queue Change Notify AdminCcs Queue Change 10 On Resolve Notify Requestors TransactionCreate On Resolve Notify Requestors Resolved 18 On SLA System Inoperable Add Watchers TransactionCreate User Defined User Defined Transaction 17 On SLA System Inoperable Notify Admin Ccs TransactionCreate User Defined Notify AdminCcs Notify on Escalation 11 On transaction, add any tags in the transaction's subject to the ticket's subject TransactionCreate On Transaction Extract Subject Tag Blank 13 [SLA] Set default service level if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require default [SLA] Set default service level Blank 15 [SLA] Set due date if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require Due set [SLA] Set due date Blank 14 [SLA] Set starts date if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require Starts set [SLA] Set starts date Blank ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is there a mailing list for AT?
Hi Todd, thank you. Was wondering about the future of AT; i appreciate any help and insights into AT. Am currently working on a localisation as well. So thanks again. Best w_e Todd Chapman wrote: The list has been down for a while and I don't have time to maintain it. The code is hosted by Google. I fully support anyone who wants to run a list. On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 10:59 AM, who else bogey...@yahoo.com wrote: Not i know of, was searching for it as well. As I am a newbie to RT and AT, i am keen to learn more about AT too, so i created a yahoo group. You can find it here: at-user-subscr...@yahoogroups.de Dont worry about the TLD; main conversation language is english :-) Of course it is still empty, because it was just created, but i invite everybody to participate. I hope i didn't break any mailing list/forum rule, if so, please let me know. Best w_e -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22354476.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22356090.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is it standard for AdminCc watchers to get 2 emails every time a ticket is created?
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 06:08 -0800, Stephen Turner wrote: Steve, can you list your scrips, both global and for the queue in question? Are your adminccs seeing this behavior for every single new ticket or just ones they generate themselves? Sorry about the last one I was trying to clean up the formatting when my touchpad went berserk and sent the message. We are only using Global scrips and here they are: # Description Stage Condition Action Template 8 On Comment Notify AdminCcs as Comment TransactionCreate On Comment Notify AdminCcs as Comment Admin Comment 9 On Comment Notify Other Recipients as Comment TransactionCreate On Comment Notify Other Recipients as Comment Correspondence 5 On Correspond Notify AdminCcs TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify AdminCcs Admin Correspondence 7 On Correspond Notify Other Recipients TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify Other Recipients Correspondence 6 On Correspond Notify Requestors and Ccs TransactionCreate On Correspond Notify Requestors and Ccs Correspondence 1 On Correspond Open Tickets TransactionCreate On Correspond Open Tickets Blank 3 On Create Autoreply To Requestors TransactionCreate On Create Autoreply To Requestors Autoreply - HDESD 4 On Create Notify AdminCcs TransactionCreate On Create Notify AdminCcs Transaction 2 On Owner Change Notify Owner TransactionCreate On Owner Change Notify Owner Transaction 16 On Queue Change Notify AdminCc TransactionCreate On Queue Change Notify AdminCcs Queue Change 10 On Resolve Notify Requestors TransactionCreate On Resolve Notify Requestors Resolved 18 On SLA System Inoperable Add Watchers TransactionCreate User Defined User Defined Transaction 17 On SLA System Inoperable Notify Admin Ccs TransactionCreate User Defined Notify AdminCcs Notify on Escalation 11 On transaction, add any tags in the transaction's subject to the ticket's subject TransactionCreate On Transaction Extract Subject Tag Blank 13 [SLA] Set default service level if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require default [SLA] Set default service level Blank 15 [SLA] Set due date if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require Due set [SLA] Set due date Blank 14 [SLA] Set starts date if needed TransactionCreate [SLA] Require Starts set [SLA] Set starts date Blank ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is it standard for AdminCc watchers to get 2 emails every time a ticket is created?
On Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:27:53 -0500, Steve OBrien steve.obr...@hdesd.org wrote: 3 On Create Autoreply To Requestors TransactionCreate On Create Autoreply To Requestors Autoreply - HDESD On the face of it, Adminccs shouldn't be getting the autoreply - I wonder if there's something in the Autoreply - HDESD template that is adding adminccs to the recipient list? Steve -- Stephen Turner Senior Programmer/Analyst - SAIS MIT IST ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is there a mailing list for AT?
The future of AT is up to it's users. It works pretty well for many right now, and as a default is sort of the same blank slate that RT is when first installed. I prefer not to do too much custom stuff in core AT that some people won't need. AT extensions can be released for that. Patches are welcome and if you have the right attitude a commit bit won't be hard to obtain. On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 12:13 PM, who else bogey...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Todd, thank you. Was wondering about the future of AT; i appreciate any help and insights into AT. Am currently working on a localisation as well. So thanks again. Best w_e Todd Chapman wrote: The list has been down for a while and I don't have time to maintain it. The code is hosted by Google. I fully support anyone who wants to run a list. On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 10:59 AM, who else bogey...@yahoo.com wrote: Not i know of, was searching for it as well. As I am a newbie to RT and AT, i am keen to learn more about AT too, so i created a yahoo group. You can find it here: at-user-subscr...@yahoogroups.de Dont worry about the TLD; main conversation language is english :-) Of course it is still empty, because it was just created, but i invite everybody to participate. I hope i didn't break any mailing list/forum rule, if so, please let me know. Best w_e -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22354476.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Is-there-a-mailing-list-for-AT--tp22331558p22356090.html Sent from the Request Tracker - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Is it standard for AdminCc watchers to get 2 emails every time a ticket is created?
On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 09:42 -0800, Stephen Turner wrote:
On the face of it, Adminccs shouldn't be getting the autoreply - I wonder
if there's something in the Autoreply - HDESD template that is adding
adminccs to the recipient list?
Here is the Template for Autoreply -HDESD, it is really just a copy of
the Autoreply template with some additional info:
Greetings from the Helpdesk,
This message has been automatically generated in response to the
creation of a trouble ticket regarding:
{$Ticket-Subject()},
a summary of which appears below.
There is no need to reply to this message right now. Your
ticket has been
assigned an ID of [{$Ticket-QueueObj-SubjectTag || $rtname}
#{$Ticket-id()}].
Please include the string:
[{$Ticket-QueueObj-SubjectTag || $rtname}
#{$Ticket-id}]
in the subject line of all future correspondence about this
issue. You may update this ticket or inquire about the status of
this ticket by simply replying to this message. You can also
logon to a web user interface using your windows username
(first.last) and windows password to view and update your ticket
at:
URL:
{RT-Config-Get('WebURL')}Ticket/Display.html?id={$Ticket-id}
Thank you,
{$Ticket-QueueObj-CorrespondAddress()}
-
{$Transaction-Content()}
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] BUG: has StealTicket but gets You can only take tickets which are unowned?
On Thu 5.Mar'09 at 2:11:34 -0800, Jo Rhett wrote: I think you're missing the point though. If you don't allow Stealticket then this wouldn't matter. The only question is if they can Steal the ticket, why force them to take duplicate steps ? Because Steal isn't the same thing as Take. Steal is an explicit break the ownership lock command. Making every take an implicit steal destroys any utility ownership locking has. pgpnzlMAMylPm.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Query
On 4 Mar 2009, at 9:52 pm, Kenneth Crocker wrote: To all Jesse, I have wondered if it would be RT Query could be enhanced to allow two things: 1) The ability to search for Queues with the LIKE command. Reason; I have several groups that have more than 15 queues (1 has 52 Queues) under their management. In order for them to write a query to look at ALL the queues they are responsible for, they have to include EACH QUEUE by name in the SQL, rather than Queue like BTS- and get all Queues that start with BTS-. That would save a bit of code and time. I second that request. Our RT now has over 70 queues, which I try to name systematically along similar lines, and this would be really useful. Actually, even better would be to have a hierarchy of queues. This would be useful not just from a query perspective but also from the point of view of granting rights to groups of queues. Regards, Tim -- The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] RT 3.8.2 - Iteration trough transaction attachments
Hi, Im using this code in RT 3.8.2: my $attachments = $Transaction-Attachments; $attachments-Limit( FIELD= 'Filename', OPERATOR = =, VALUE= '' ); while ( my $message = $attachments-Next ) . .. So I can do a While trough all the attachments that aren't ticket file attachments but this isn't working. I saw this example (http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/AddAttachmentLinksToMail) but here they want the attachments. When I changed the OPERATOR from != to = it doesn't work. What am I missing? I want to build a final message history to send to the client by email but I want to ignore the file attachments sent by the user in the email messages. How can I do that? TIA, Filipe Clemente Portugal ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] BUG: has StealTicket but gets You can only take tickets which are unowned?
Jo Rhett, I only grant ticket owners the ModifyTicket right, so noone CAN bulkudate a ticket that isn't theirs. Kenn LBNL On 3/5/2009 2:11 AM, Jo Rhett wrote: I think you're missing the point though. If you don't allow Stealticket then this wouldn't matter. The only question is if they can Steal the ticket, why force them to take duplicate steps ? I don't understand why you don't want more control for Bulk Update. So any of your users can cause every one of your ticket requestors to get a blank message ... and this is good how? The point here is to allow each organization to work how they like best. Don't take away StealTicket just because you don't allow it. Just don't assign the right. On Mar 4, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Kenneth Crocker wrote: I agree with Jesse. Although it is a pain in the rump to have to go thru 2 steps to re-assign a ticket, I am of the mind that when you lossen the the reins of ownership (and for that matter let too many users have the ModifyTicket right.) you run the risk of owners undoing each others work. We allow only 2 users to have the ModifyTicket right, Owners and the AdminCc (which for us is the Queue Manager). We only allow the Queue manager to have the StealTicket right. The reason is that for us, tight control of tickets and the work on them is critical. We just can't allow users the ability to point at one another and say he did it. Obviously, there are MANY RT installations that are smaller and need WAY less control. However, I would prefer that we have a choice of degree for control, like in the RT_SiteConfig, rather than just opening it all up OR removing such features as Bulk Update, which I use a lot when setting up new queues or when a queue needs to do a mass change to a CF or something. just a thought. Kenn LBNL On 3/4/2009 11:33 AM, Jesse Vincent wrote: On Wed 4.Mar'09 at 11:29:38 -0800, Jo Rhett wrote: Reading the code in Ticket_Overlay around line 2730-2750 it would appear that this is deliberate. For someone to reassign a ticket to someone else on their reply, they must be the current owner. For me to take it back and close it, I need to separately Steal it, then Resolve it. Would you accept a patch that allows implicit Steal like this? Nope. That would entirely defeat ownership-as-locking. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Scrip and custom field Help
Chris, Why in the world do you have a Custom Field named the same as a RT Ticket field? To me, that would create a bit of confusion when someone would discuss the values in the two fields. I wouldn't know which one they are talking about, the Custom Field or the Ticket field. Also, if the RT Ticket Status field says resolved, then the ticket IS closed and any other iteration would be redundant. We have a Custom Field called Work-State which allows for more granularity when IN a particular status. For example, the TIcket Status may be open, but the work is On Hold or In progress or Unit Testing, etc. That way, we have a Ticket Status telling us what is going on with the Ticket and a Custom Field telling what step the actual work is on. Just a thought. Kenn LBNL On 3/5/2009 8:12 AM, Chris Newcomb wrote: I've googled and either my google fu is not working or I'm not finding the correct answer, and I barely know perl. Using RT 3.8.1 on freebsd using mysql Condition: On Resolve Action: is where I need help. I have a custom field named TicketStatus. I want to on resolve set the custom field to be Closed [Orbit], usually the ticket status is either Created [Orbit] or Updated [Orbit]. any pointers that you can give me would be great, either by telling me what to search for or giving me an idea of what to use to get the action done. -- Thanks in advance Chris Newcomb ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Email delay on ticket creation
Hi all, I have not posted to this list in a long time. I was quite stumped for a long time trying to get sendmail configured properly on Mac OS X (client) and I finally did... So, I have a new install of RT 3.8.1 on FreeBSD (Mac OS X). I'm having trouble with what seems to be random delays in the email notifications to admincc's when a user emails in a new request. I am having a great deal of trouble figuring out where the delay is coming from, I have googled and searched RT's wiki, and I'm not coming up with anything, so I'm turning to the list for help. Most actions that generate email, the email is delivered immediately. When a user submits an email to RT that is creating a new ticket, their autoreply email is sent immediately, but then the notice to us (the admincc's) has a 'delay=5235' or other random high number in it. Performing another action in RT that generates another email makes both the new email and the as-yet-undelivered email be delivered immediately. I captured all the info I could from mail.log and httpd/system.log, and there wasn't anything related in system.log. I'm open to any ideas. In this case the delay time was set to 5842. I have seen it set to other times, usually in the thousands. If we aren't paying close attention to RT a new ticket can go unnoticed for sometimes 40 minutes, sometimes well over 2 hours... from /var/log/mail.log Mar 5 13:59:11 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtpd[429]: connect from mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20] Mar 5 13:59:11 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtpd[429]: 63F9B83254: client=mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20] Mar 5 13:59:11 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/cleanup[432]: 63F9B83254: message-id=c5d58b2c.9f31%theu...@ourcompany.com Mar 5 13:59:11 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: 63F9B83254: from=theu...@ourcompany.com, size=1980, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 5 13:59:11 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtpd[429]: disconnect from mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20] Mar 5 13:59:14 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/pickup[422]: 2D92F83275: uid=70 from=www Mar 5 13:59:14 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/cleanup[432]: 2D92F83275: message-id=rt-3.8.1-408-1236279553-905.30082-...@ourcompany.com Mar 5 13:59:14 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: 2D92F83275: from=w...@rt3.ourcompany.com, size=1814, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 5 13:59:14 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtp[437]: 2D92F83275: to=theu...@ourcompany.com, relay=mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20], delay=0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 49b02102-000ac917 Message accepted for delivery) Mar 5 13:59:14 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: 2D92F83275: removed Mar 5 13:59:15 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/local[433]: 63F9B83254: to=facilit...@rt3.ourcompany.com, relay=local, delay=4, status=sent (delivered to command: /opt/rt3/bin/rt-mailgate --queue facilities --action correspond --url http://localhost/rt) Mar 5 13:59:15 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: 63F9B83254: removed Above is the user submitting the request Mar 5 15:36:35 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/pickup[491]: ECAAF833A0: uid=70 from=www Mar 5 15:36:36 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/cleanup[492]: ECAAF833A0: message-id=rt-3.8.1-408-1236279553-1271.30082-...@ourcompany.com Mar 5 15:36:36 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: ECAAF833A0: from=w...@rt3.ourcompany.com, size=2284, nrcpt=3 (queue active) Mar 5 15:36:36 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtp[494]: ECAAF833A0: to=de...@ourcompany.com, relay=mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20], delay=5842, status=sent (250 2.0.0 49b037d4-000acb38 Message accepted for delivery) Mar 5 15:36:36 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: ECAAF833A0: removed Above is the user's request being relayed to us admincc's Mar 5 15:36:55 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/pickup[491]: AA81C833AB: uid=70 from=www Mar 5 15:36:55 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/cleanup[492]: AA81C833AB: message-id=rt-3.8.1-487-1236285414-1997.30082-...@ourcompany.com Mar 5 15:36:55 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: AA81C833AB: from=w...@rt3.ourcompany.com, size=1003, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Mar 5 15:36:55 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/smtp[494]: AA81C833AB: to=de...@ourcompany.com, relay=mailserver.ourcompany.com[10.2.0.20], delay=0, status=sent (250 2.0.0 49b037e7-000acb39 Message accepted for delivery) Mar 5 15:36:55 rt3-ourcompany-com postfix/qmgr[239]: AA81C833AB: removed Above is my taking the ticket, generating an email to me, what I think 'pushed' the other message on it's way. from /var/log/httpd/error.log (times in GMT, so -5:00) [Thu Mar 5 18:59:14 2009] [info]: rt-3.8.1-408-1236279553-905.30082-...@ourcompany.com #30082/1590 - Scrip 3 On Create Autoreply To Requestors (/opt/rt3/bin/../lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:302) [Thu Mar 5 18:59:14 2009] [info]: rt-3.8.1-408-1236279553-905.30082-...@ourcompany.com sent To: theu...@ourcompany.com (/opt/rt3/bin/../lib/RT/Action/SendEmail.pm:333) [Thu Mar 5 18:59:14 2009] [info]: rt-3.8.1-408-1236279553-1271.30082-...@ourcompany.com #30082/1590 - Scrip 4 On Create Notify AdminCcs
[rt-users] De-normalized RT Views
To all, We have found that the RT Query tool doesn't allow certain type of searches we would like to have. SO we created some de-normalized views that allow us to use SQL Plus or SQL Navigator, etc. as a tool to access our RT ticket data. We are on Oracle, so I'm not sure if the code to create these views will be helpful to anyone else, but I'll share them with anyone interested. Also, I'd like to put them in the wiki for RT, but I've never been there and would need some instruction on how to do that. Also, for those who have been looking for ways to convert from one ticketing system to RT, we have written a program in Perl to do just that. It uses the API, so that all relevant table records are updated in RT. Again, we use Oracle, so this may not work for you, but the logic and process should. All you would have to do is change the syntax and any environmental setups so the program would work for you and you've got it. Anyone interested in that? Kenn LBNL ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] BUG: has StealTicket but gets You can only take tickets which are unowned?
On Mar 5, 2009, at 10:16 AM, Jesse Vincent wrote: On Thu 5.Mar'09 at 2:11:34 -0800, Jo Rhett wrote: I think you're missing the point though. If you don't allow Stealticket then this wouldn't matter. The only question is if they can Steal the ticket, why force them to take duplicate steps ? Because Steal isn't the same thing as Take. Steal is an explicit break the ownership lock command. Making every take an implicit steal destroys any utility ownership locking has. I think what we're bumping into here is a total lack of documentation on how this locking has been theorized and is supposed to work. I don't witness this locking behavior at all. Based on the rights here, anyone can answer any ticket, any time. That is pretty much how we want it. So having part of the system trying to enforce a stricter policy that we've defined the rights for doesn't make sense to me. (not that stricter shouldn't be possible -- it should be, just not if we want to turn it off) If there was some documentation on how Take and Steal are supposed to interact, with some guidelines on how to properly implement some common scenarios, I wouldn't be so confused. If someone has this on the top of their brain or already written down somewhere and can punt it into the wiki (as the only apparent source of updated documentation) that would be great. Notes: 1. Yes someday I'll have time to read the code and then I will document it so I won't forget it. That day isn't today, and won't be anytime in the next week either. 2. I'm not arguing that any else should have as loose of a policy as we do. Different needs for different environments. I'm just suggesting that someone else wanting it tighter shouldn't mean that we *must* run our organization the same way. For anyone who wants a one true way point of view there is always OTRS ;-) 3. What does seem to be lacking is real locking -- preventing race conditions on who types the fastest. When I have some free time, I was going to see how hard it would be to implement someone is typing on this ticket RIGHT NOW kind of locks. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] BUG: has StealTicket but gets You can only take tickets which are unowned?
On Mar 5, 2009, at 2:32 PM, Kenneth Crocker wrote: I only grant ticket owners the ModifyTicket right, so noone CAN bulkudate a ticket that isn't theirs. For your environment that may make sense, but not here. OTRS enforces that kind of approach -- you can't turn it off without hacking the source code. And our general overhead to respond to a ticket was 8- times-higher than the actual time spent answering the tickets. When you have a fairly equal support team and anybody can answer almost everything, the last thing in the world you want to do is force people to keep unassigning and reassigning tickets to themselves. In our environment 98% of tickets never take an owner. We only do that to indicate that only I can do this, ya'all leave it be Using RT with everyone having OwnTicket, TakeTicket, StealTicket, ModifyTicket, etc has reduced our overheard to about 1.2:1 which is totally acceptable in our mind. Now people have stopped avoiding using the ticket system because it's no longer a PITA to use. Anyway, long post for a short idea: different uses for different users ;-) This particular piece of code seems to implement a stricter policy that clashes with the rights assignments. -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
