Alfred Campbell wrote: > Sorry for the top post however Outlook dealing with HTML emails is poor > to say the least… > > > > Personally I like approach 2 however I have to wonder about the > Administrator in a large new customer. If I am a 200 user customer > where 100 users would like to use this feature then trying to support > this will be interesting. The administrator will end up spending quite > an effort getting those 100 users just to have MyAssistant in the > roster. (explaining to have them go into the user portal, etc..) > Approach 1 would really eliminate lots of the administrator work however > give the user less freedom. For power users like Scott, Robert and the > rest of us this maybe bad however not sure about the average Joe. > > > > Would be interesting to hear from some folks who deploy to “normal” > users in the community. >
I am with Al on that. I still think we should give admin a chance to add PA to any group she wants. It's not like we are forcing anyone to use this feature and it does solve provisioning problem. It's also simple to implement and simple to use. End user driven approach (2) can be implemented independently. D. _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
