Re: [rt-users] which Perl version should one use with RT 4.4 on CentOS 6

2016-03-15 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
If you can upgrade to the latest version of CentOS 7, you'll get perl

Joseph D. Wagner

On 2016-03-15 03:06, Boris Epstein wrote:

> Hi Peter, 
> Thanks, I saw that. 
> I was wondering what the benefits and general experience was of those who 
> used later versions of Perl 5 or Perl 6 vs 5.10.1. Just trying to see if it 
> was a worthwhile exercize trying to upgrade - which on Centos did not seem to 
> be trivial. 
> Cheers, 
> Boris. 
> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 4:27 AM, Peter Viskup <> wrote:
>> Hello Boris,
>> from readme [1] on github it is obvious the RT needs Perl as of
>> version 5.10.1 and above. Readme file from 4.4 version has the same
>> list of requirements.
>> Some RT modules may have their own dependencies. You need to check them.
>> [1]
>> --
>> Peter Viskup
>> On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Boris Epstein <> wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>> I am about to upgrade my RT 4.2 to v4.4 on a CentOS 6 machine. It appears
>>> that Perl 5.1 is barely adequate. What is the recommended version of Perl
>>> for this setup?
>>> Thanks.
>>> Cheers,
>>> Boris.
>>> -
>>> RT 4.4 and RTIR Training Sessions
>>> * Washington DC - May 23 & 24, 2016
> -
> RT 4.4 and RTIR Training Sessions
> * Washington DC - May 23 & 24, 2016
RT 4.4 and RTIR Training Sessions
* Washington DC - May 23 & 24, 2016

Re: [rt-users] rt-mailgate needs http for comment

2015-09-06 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
Ok, I'm inching closer.  I found out that it works if I run it from the 
command line, but not when sendmail fires it off.  (This probably gave 
me the false sense that it worked by switching to HTTP.)

I turned on debug level logging in RT.  It logged a bunch of stuff when 
run from the command line, but it didn't log anything when sendmail did it.

Joseph D. Wagner

Re: [rt-users] rt-mailgate needs http for comment

2015-09-06 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
Figured it out.  I created a catch-all address in virtusertable. Unknown 
to me, virtusertable gets processed before aliases, so it was hitting 
the catch-all and never made it to aliases.

Joseph D. Wagner

On 09/06/2015 12:13 PM, Alex Vandiver wrote:

On Sun, Sep 06, 2015 at 12:31:28AM -0700, Joseph D. Wagner wrote:

Here it is.  I left everything intact except the url.

Those look fine.  Double-check that you have not multiply-defined
prc-staff elsewhere in aliases, and that you've run `newaliases`.
Short of that, my only suggestion is to turn on bug logging in your
MTA -- I can say with certainty that rt-mailgate doesn't deal
differently with correspond vs comment and http/https connections.
  - Alex

Re: [rt-users] rt-mailgate needs http for comment

2015-09-06 Thread Joseph D. Wagner

Here it is.  I left everything intact except the url.

prc:"|/usr/bin/rt-mailgate --queue 'Performance Review' 
--action correspond --url https://./rt;
prc-staff:  "|/usr/bin/rt-mailgate --queue 'Performance Review' 
--action comment--url https://./rt;


On 09/05/2015 11:32 PM, Alex Vandiver wrote:

On Sat, Sep 05, 2015 at 11:22:48PM -0700, Joseph D. Wagner wrote:

I had apache set to allow rt over https only.  Trying over http would fail.

rt-mailgate was working perfectly fine over https when using
"--action correspond".  However, when using "--action comment", it
fails saying it is unable to connect.

When I changed my apache configuration to allow http on local
connections, it started working.

I suspect there is some code in the comment path of rt-mailgate that
is forcing it over the http connection, rather than properly
deriving the connection from the url parameter.

Being new to rt, I am open to the possibility I misconfigured
something.  Is anyone else able to reproduce this?

I strongly suspect misconfiguration in your /etc/aliases.  The only
difference between correspond and comment paths is the value of a
query parameter that they POST:

Check to make sure that you have https:// on all of your aliases, and
that you've run newaliases (or equivalent) after updating them.
  - Alex

Re: [rt-users] RT 4.2.12 and CentOS 7

2015-09-02 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
I got it working by doing a complete gut and replacement with the Perl
packages from Fedora 21.


From: rt-users [] On Behalf
Of Tom Misilo
Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 10:24 AM
To: ''
Subject: [rt-users] RT 4.2.12 and CentOS 7




I was wondering if anyone has successfully used "make fixdeps" with Request
Tracker on CentOS 7? As it seems like cpan only installs to the local users
home directory in a ~/perl5 folder and not systemwide. Which when using
Request Tracker and mod_fcgid  apache does not find any of the modules.


Thank you,





Re: [rt-users] rt cluster using postgres

2015-08-28 Thread Joseph D. Wagner

I think your solution is going to come from postgres, rather than RT.

I believe Ticket ID's come from tickets_id_seq.  You could set them to 
increment by 2, with one starting at an even number and another starting 
at an odd number.


However, I don't have enough experience with clustering to know if 
that's a good idea.

Here's some info on postgres that could be useful to your situation:,_Clustering,_and_Connection_Pooling

Joseph Wagner

On 08/28/2015 03:35 PM, Jeff Mundine wrote:

I had an idea to cluster RT, using postgres to synchronize the different
RT servers.
The only issue I have, is if the DB's stop talking to eachother, then
there would be a problem with the ticket sequencing. (you would get
duplicate tickets for the same id).

I've tried to look around for something like modifying the ticket id. I
know it's numeric only, but haven't found much to do something like have
one server do odd numbers, the other even or some such..
Any ideas of a way to do this, or is it simply not possible at this

Also, any other reasons or possible problems anyone could see with this?

My secondary step, is just to run 1 instance, but use the postgres
replication and probably rsync for a hot standby.

Re: [rt-users] Lockdown CC and AdminCC

2015-08-24 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
 What do you mean by without logins? The email address needs
 to correspond to a user that already exists on the system?

Yes.  Here's what happened.  A privileged user entered an external email 
address into the CC field, which did not have an account.  RT autocreated an 
account for that person, and it accepted that external email address on the CC 
field.  I need to prevent that.

How can I limit CC and AdminCC to email addresses that already have accounts?  
Either rejecting the ticket or silently failing to add the CC/AdminCC email 
address would be acceptable.

Joseph D. Wagner

[rt-users] Lockdown CC and AdminCC

2015-08-24 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
I need to limit what users can enter into CC and AdminCC.  I cannot have 
them entering email addresses for those without logins.

How can I limit or secure this?

Joseph D. Wagner

Re: [rt-users] Eliminating quoted text in email web replies

2015-08-11 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
I don't think the solution is to have Microsoft, Apple, IBM, Gmail, Yahoo, 
Hotmail, AOL, etc rewrite their MUA's.  I think the solution is a new feature 
to RT.

RT is already parsing and filtering quoted text on the website.  It should be 
only a moderate amount of development effort to do the same thing before 
sending out emails.

I would recommend contacting the developers about this as a new feature request.

Joseph Wagner

From: rt-users [] On Behalf Of 
Guadagnino Cristiano
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2015 3:28 AM
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Eliminating quoted text in email  web replies

Hi Josiah,
we have the same problem.

I don't think RT can do anything about this problem, as MUAs used several 
different ways to indicate quoted text.
The worst of all is Outlook, and in fact RT very often cannot correctly 
identify quoted text when coming from it.

So I have been thinking (since a long time) that there should be a way to tell 
MUAs not to quote. I don't know why nobody thought this before.
I am thinking about a new mail header that tells the MUA not to quote text when 
replying to a message.
This header could be used by all kinds of automated softwares that use email to 
communicate bi-directionally, like RT.

MUAs could then decide what to do: blindly obey the header or ask the user or 
use some pre-configured parameter or... any of a number of possibilities.

I was thinking about sending an RFC to request implementation of this new 
header, but finally I decided otherwise for a number of reasons.

First, sending an RFC seems a complicated issue. Second, I have very little 
time to understand how this is done and then to do it. Third, it would be a 
very slow process before the RFC is approved (*if* it is approved) and 
implemented by a good number of MUAs.

I am sharing these thought because maybe someone will find it a worthwhile idea 
and decide to go on and present an RFC to the IETF. Who knows?


On 10/08/2015 22:55, Josiah Philipsen wrote:
I have been trying to watch this ticket to see if someone has a solution, but 
there have not been any replies. Does anyone know how to remove the quoted text 
in an email sent to RT, so the tickets don't get as flooded. 


On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 6:08 PM, Subjected 
Is there any way to remove or delete quoted text in email replies or replies 
from the self-service web interface?

Whenever a user replies to a ticket notification, usually their email client 
quotes the original text. When the reply is received by RT and notifications 
sent to ticket owners, it includes the quoted text. This ends up making a real 
mess of replies and becomes difficult to see the new information.

I can see in the web interface how RT tries to hide the quoted text. This helps 
with the web interface and self-service, but email updates are still are 
polluted with unnecessary quoted text from previous replies.

We include this text in the top of our email templates:

## For best results, when replying to this email, first DELETE the quoted 
message body before entering your reply ##

But most users ignore those instructions.

Is there any way to force RT to delete any quoted text for an update from a 
prior RT email notification?

[rt-users] Custom Field Security

2015-08-04 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
I would like for unprivileged users to be able to enter and view custom 
fields on the tickets they enter.

I setup the custom field for Ticket and added it to a specific Queue.  I 
figured out how unprivileged users can enter custom fields for tickets 
they file -- SeeCustomField and ModifyCustomField.

However, after the ticket is entered, unprivileged users cannot see the 
custom field data they just entered on the SelfService/Display.html 
page.  Only privileged users can see this.

How can I set this up so unprivileged users can see the custom field 
data they just entered?

Any help would be appreciated.  Thanks.

Joseph D. Wagner

[rt-users] Pre-Populate Description

2015-08-04 Thread Joseph D. Wagner
I would like to pre-populate the description of a new ticket. For 
example, if I filed a bug on Red Hat's Bugzilla, a new bug description 
already contains the text:

Expected Results:
Actual Results:
Additional Info:

A feature like this would be very helpful to guiding users with what 
data they should enter. Can this be done in RT? If so, how?


Joseph D. Wagner