3.6.1 search bug?

I’m running RT-3.6.1.

If I “Add” a search criterion using the drop down box whose
default is “Requestor EmailAddress” and then “Add and Search"
with a second criterion, the process fails with a message
"Unknown Field: Requestor.EmailAddress” (or whatever field
was selected from the drop-down box).

If I “Add and Search” with a “Requestor EmailAddress” criterion
alone, no error occurs and I get results.

If I “Add” a different criteron, (e.g., “Created Before”) and
then Add and Search with “Requestor EmailAddress” (or any other
choice from that drop-down list), no error occurs and I get results.

Anyone else see this behaviour?
Gary Hall hall@fas.sfu.ca | Voice (604) 291-5925
Faculty of Applied Sciences | Fax (604) 291-5404
Simon Fraser University |
Burnaby, B.C. V5A 1S6 |

Gary Hall wrote:

I’m running RT-3.6.1.

If I “Add” a search criterion using the drop down box whose
default is “Requestor EmailAddress” and then “Add and Search"
with a second criterion, the process fails with a message
"Unknown Field: Requestor.EmailAddress” (or whatever field
was selected from the drop-down box).

If I “Add and Search” with a “Requestor EmailAddress” criterion
alone, no error occurs and I get results.

If I “Add” a different criteron, (e.g., “Created Before”) and
then Add and Search with “Requestor EmailAddress” (or any other
choice from that drop-down list), no error occurs and I get results.

Anyone else see this behaviour?

Worked for me. I selected the Owner criteria, added it and then
selected the Requestor EmailAddress field then “Add and Search”'ed it.
I got exactly what I was expecting.

I’m running RT on Fedora Core 5 using mod_perl and MySQL.

Mathew Snyder

Gary Hall wrote:

I’m running RT-3.6.1.

If I “Add” a search criterion using the drop down box whose
default is “Requestor EmailAddress” and then “Add and Search"
with a second criterion, the process fails with a message
"Unknown Field: Requestor.EmailAddress” (or whatever field
was selected from the drop-down box).

If I “Add and Search” with a “Requestor EmailAddress” criterion
alone, no error occurs and I get results.

If I “Add” a different criteron, (e.g., “Created Before”) and
then Add and Search with “Requestor EmailAddress” (or any other
choice from that drop-down list), no error occurs and I get results.

Anyone else see this behaviour?

CORRECTION:

I did it wrong. I fixed my process and made sure it matched the same
steps you took when you got the error. I am also getting this error.

Mathew Snyder

I wonder if you might glean some truth by enabling debug output in
Elements/Footer:

<%ARGS>
$Debug => 2 <--------- changed from 0
$Menu => 1
</%ARGS>

Just a thought.

David Smithson

CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUPPORTFrom: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Mathew
Snyder
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 6:05 PM
To: Gary Hall
Cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] 3.6.1 search bug?

Gary Hall wrote:

I’m running RT-3.6.1.

If I “Add” a search criterion using the drop down box whose
default is “Requestor EmailAddress” and then “Add and Search"
with a second criterion, the process fails with a message
"Unknown Field: Requestor.EmailAddress” (or whatever field
was selected from the drop-down box).

If I “Add and Search” with a “Requestor EmailAddress” criterion
alone, no error occurs and I get results.

If I “Add” a different criteron, (e.g., “Created Before”) and
then Add and Search with “Requestor EmailAddress” (or any other
choice from that drop-down list), no error occurs and I get results.

Anyone else see this behaviour?

CORRECTION:

I did it wrong. I fixed my process and made sure it matched the same
steps you took when you got the error. I am also getting this error.

Mathew Snyder
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Hi All,

We need to install customer facing ticketing system so that customers can
create / check status / comment on the ticket using web interface. Once
ticket is created our admins will work to resolve it.

Checking if anybody has implemented RT in above fashion.

Thanks for any inputs, suggestions, thoughts,

Sudhir Damle

Hi. We’re currently implementing RT in this way for our customers. In
our model, each customer has their own queue, so that we can manage
permissions in such a way that will allow AdminCC customers to do a
minimal amount of queue management without having the ability to see
other queues. Each customer( company ) has designated AdminCC personnel
who can see all tickets in their queue. The rest of the end users at
the customer company can create tickets in the queue and track progress
on their tickets via the web interface. So far, I have not come up with
a perfect group rights model for the customer AdminCCs. The end user
part works fine, because they seem to use the SelfService module. We
haven’t released this to our customers yet, but plan to have all the
bugs worked out for a release end of this month. At that point, I
should be able to send you a list of group rights that work for this
model.

We are an IT services and consulting group, and so far, I see no reason
why RT won’t work for us and our model which tends to be strong on the
customer visibility side.

We are migrating from an old proprietary system, born in the dot com
era. At this point, we’ve imported about 10,000 tickets, 13,000
transactions ( as attachments of type Comment ), 700 users, and a few
hundred customers. We expect that our rate of ticket creation and
number of tickets per month will increase due to the existence of RT
alone. I’m babbling now. Time to put the keyboard away.

David Smithson

CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUPPORT-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Sudhir
Damle
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:38 PM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: [rt-users] RT as customer facing ticketing system.

Hi All,

We need to install customer facing ticketing system so that customers
can
create / check status / comment on the ticket using web interface. Once
ticket is created our admins will work to resolve it.

Checking if anybody has implemented RT in above fashion.

Thanks for any inputs, suggestions, thoughts,

Sudhir Damle

http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

  • On 10/08/06 20:38 -0700, Sudhir Damle wrote:
    | Hi All,
    |
    | We need to install customer facing ticketing system so that customers can
    | create / check status / comment on the ticket using web interface. Once
    | ticket is created our admins will work to resolve it.
    |
    | Checking if anybody has implemented RT in above fashion.
    |
    | Thanks for any inputs, suggestions, thoughts,
    |

Hello Sudhir,

Next time, please don’t hijack a threat. Start your own.
Now that you know, please see the following Wiki entry:

http://wiki.bestpractical.com/index.cgi?AutogeneratedPassword

PS: There are other considerations you have to make when using
this, regarding permissions to Create Ticket, View Tickets…
but those are basic RT stuff that you must know.

-Wash

http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html

DISCLAIMER: See http://www.wananchi.com/bms/terms.php

|\      _,,,---,,_     | Odhiambo Washington    <wash@wananchi.com>

Zzz /,.-'’ -. ;-;;,_ | Wananchi Online Ltd. www.wananchi.com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( '-'| Tel: +254 20 313985-9 +254 20 313922 '---''(_/--'-’_) | GSM: +254 722 743223 +254 733 744121

Experience is what causes a person to make new mistakes instead of old
ones.

David, Thanks for detail reply.

I am concerned about two things at this point:

Difficulty in customizing home screen, for example customers do not need to
see ‘my Tickets’ when they login, since tickets will always be owned by
admins. Customizing through /preferences/RT at a glance does it for that
user, how to do it for a group and maybe different settings for individual
group?

Hiding other queue and username, even if users are set to see only their
queue, group, they do see other user names and queue names in dropdown list.

By the way I am using version 3.5.4 for trying these things.

Sudhir Damle-----Original Message-----
From: David Smithson [mailto:dsmithson@activsupport.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 9:04 PM
To: Sudhir Damle; rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] RT as customer facing ticketing system.

Hi. We’re currently implementing RT in this way for our customers. In
our model, each customer has their own queue, so that we can manage
permissions in such a way that will allow AdminCC customers to do a
minimal amount of queue management without having the ability to see
other queues. Each customer( company ) has designated AdminCC personnel
who can see all tickets in their queue. The rest of the end users at
the customer company can create tickets in the queue and track progress
on their tickets via the web interface. So far, I have not come up with
a perfect group rights model for the customer AdminCCs. The end user
part works fine, because they seem to use the SelfService module. We
haven’t released this to our customers yet, but plan to have all the
bugs worked out for a release end of this month. At that point, I
should be able to send you a list of group rights that work for this
model.

We are an IT services and consulting group, and so far, I see no reason
why RT won’t work for us and our model which tends to be strong on the
customer visibility side.

We are migrating from an old proprietary system, born in the dot com
era. At this point, we’ve imported about 10,000 tickets, 13,000
transactions ( as attachments of type Comment ), 700 users, and a few
hundred customers. We expect that our rate of ticket creation and
number of tickets per month will increase due to the existence of RT
alone. I’m babbling now. Time to put the keyboard away.

David Smithson

CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUPPORT

-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Sudhir
Damle
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:38 PM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: [rt-users] RT as customer facing ticketing system.

Hi All,

We need to install customer facing ticketing system so that customers
can
create / check status / comment on the ticket using web interface. Once
ticket is created our admins will work to resolve it.

Checking if anybody has implemented RT in above fashion.

Thanks for any inputs, suggestions, thoughts,

Sudhir Damle

http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

If your users are unprivileged (uncheck Let this user be granted rights
on the user page) they will log into the Self Service interface and this
is a non-issue.

Sudhir Damle wrote:

David, Thanks for detail reply.

I am concerned about two things at this point:

Difficulty in customizing home screen, for example customers do not need to
see ‘my Tickets’ when they login, since tickets will always be owned by
admins. Customizing through /preferences/RT at a glance does it for that
user, how to do it for a group and maybe different settings for individual
group?

Hiding other queue and username, even if users are set to see only their
queue, group, they do see other user names and queue names in dropdown list.

By the way I am using version 3.5.4 for trying these things.

Sudhir Damle

-----Original Message-----
From: David Smithson [mailto:dsmithson@activsupport.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 9:04 PM
To: Sudhir Damle; rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: RE: [rt-users] RT as customer facing ticketing system.

Hi. We’re currently implementing RT in this way for our customers. In
our model, each customer has their own queue, so that we can manage
permissions in such a way that will allow AdminCC customers to do a
minimal amount of queue management without having the ability to see
other queues. Each customer( company ) has designated AdminCC personnel
who can see all tickets in their queue. The rest of the end users at
the customer company can create tickets in the queue and track progress
on their tickets via the web interface. So far, I have not come up with
a perfect group rights model for the customer AdminCCs. The end user
part works fine, because they seem to use the SelfService module. We
haven’t released this to our customers yet, but plan to have all the
bugs worked out for a release end of this month. At that point, I
should be able to send you a list of group rights that work for this
model.

We are an IT services and consulting group, and so far, I see no reason
why RT won’t work for us and our model which tends to be strong on the
customer visibility side.

We are migrating from an old proprietary system, born in the dot com
era. At this point, we’ve imported about 10,000 tickets, 13,000
transactions ( as attachments of type Comment ), 700 users, and a few
hundred customers. We expect that our rate of ticket creation and
number of tickets per month will increase due to the existence of RT
alone. I’m babbling now. Time to put the keyboard away.

David Smithson


CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUPPORT

-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Sudhir
Damle
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:38 PM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: [rt-users] RT as customer facing ticketing system.

Hi All,

We need to install customer facing ticketing system so that customers
can
create / check status / comment on the ticket using web interface. Once
ticket is created our admins will work to resolve it.

Checking if anybody has implemented RT in above fashion.

Thanks for any inputs, suggestions, thoughts,

Sudhir Damle


http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@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: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

Drew Barnes
Applications Analyst
Raymond Walters College
University of Cincinnati

I also get the error ‘Unknown field: Requestor.EmailAddress’.
The debug output as suggested by David Smithson is the following:

$%ARGS = {
‘ActorOp’ => ‘=’,
‘AndOr’ => ‘AND’,
‘WatcherOp’ => ‘LIKE’,
‘ValueOfActor’ => ‘’,
‘Format’ => ‘’ id/TITLE:#’,
Subject/TITLE:Subject’,
Status’,
QueueName’,
OwnerName’,
Priority’,
NEWLINE’,
’’,
Requestors’,
CreatedRelative’,
ToldRelative’,
LastUpdatedRelative’,
TimeLeft’’,
‘LinksOp’ => ‘=’,
‘PriorityOp’ => ‘<’,
‘idOp’ => ‘<’,
‘SearchId’ => ‘new’,
‘Size’ => ‘’,
‘ActorField’ => ‘Owner’,
‘clauses’ => ‘0’,
‘PriorityField’ => ‘Priority’,
‘LinksField’ => ‘HasMember’,
‘ValueOfStatus’ => ‘’,
‘ValueOfLinks’ => ‘’,
‘ValueOfPriority’ => ‘’,
‘ValueOfTime-TimeUnits’ => ‘minutes’,
‘Query’ => ’ Requestor.EmailAddress LIKE ‘test’’,
‘ValueOfTime’ => ‘’,
‘DoSearch’ => ‘Add and Search’,
‘AttachmentOp’ => ‘LIKE’,
‘ValueOfDate’ => ‘’,
‘TimeOp’ => ‘<’,
‘QueueOp’ => ‘=’,
‘Title’ => ‘’,
‘Order’ => [
‘ASC’,
‘ASC’,
‘ASC’,
‘ASC’
],
‘AttachmentField’ => ‘Subject’,
‘Face’ => ‘’,
‘Link’ => ‘None’,
‘StatusOp’ => ‘=’,
‘TimeField’ => ‘TimeWorked’,
‘DateField’ => ‘Created’,
‘RowsPerPage’ => ‘0’,
‘ValueOfQueue’ => ‘’,
‘ValueOfid’ => ‘’,
‘WatcherField’ => ‘Requestor.EmailAddress’,
‘ValueOfWatcher’ => ‘’,
‘DateOp’ => ‘<’,
‘ValueOfAttachment’ => ‘’,
‘OrderBy’ => [
‘id’,
’’,
’’,
’’
]
};

Thanks for help.
Jörg EichhornOn 11.08.2006 03:29, David Smithson wrote:

I wonder if you might glean some truth by enabling debug output in
Elements/Footer:

<%ARGS>
$Debug => 2 <--------- changed from 0
$Menu => 1
</%ARGS>

Just a thought.

David Smithson


CLICK HERE FOR ONLINE SUPPORT

-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Mathew
Snyder
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 6:05 PM
To: Gary Hall
Cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] 3.6.1 search bug?

Gary Hall wrote:

I’m running RT-3.6.1.

If I “Add” a search criterion using the drop down box whose
default is “Requestor EmailAddress” and then “Add and Search"
with a second criterion, the process fails with a message
"Unknown Field: Requestor.EmailAddress” (or whatever field
was selected from the drop-down box).

If I “Add and Search” with a “Requestor EmailAddress” criterion
alone, no error occurs and I get results.

If I “Add” a different criteron, (e.g., “Created Before”) and
then Add and Search with “Requestor EmailAddress” (or any other
choice from that drop-down list), no error occurs and I get results.

Anyone else see this behaviour?

CORRECTION:

I did it wrong. I fixed my process and made sure it matched the same
steps you took when you got the error. I am also getting this error.

Mathew Snyder

I also get the error ‘Unknown field: Requestor.EmailAddress’.
The debug output as suggested by David Smithson is the following:
[…]

We also get this behavior running RT 3.6.1 with Apache 2.0.58,
mod_perl 2.0.2, mod_ssl 2.0.58 and Perl 5.8.8. DBIx::SearchBuilder
is at 1.43.

[Will Maier]-----------------[willmaier@ml1.net|http://www.lfod.us/]

Hello,

We saw this as well with 3.6.1, both in an upgrade from 3.4.5 and 3.6.0.
To temporarily overcome it, we put share/html/Search/Build.html from
3.6.0 into local/html/Search/Build.html on our 3.6.1 system. Since that
appears to have resolved the issue, I’m guessing that something changed
(the diff is pretty long).

Eric Gauthier
Network Engineer
617-353-8218 ~^~ elg@nsegc.bu.edu
Boston University - Office of ITFrom: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
[mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Will
Maier
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 10:36 AM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] 3.6.1 search bug?

I also get the error ‘Unknown field: Requestor.EmailAddress’.
The debug output as suggested by David Smithson is the following:
[…]

We also get this behavior running RT 3.6.1 with Apache 2.0.58, mod_perl
2.0.2, mod_ssl 2.0.58 and Perl 5.8.8. DBIx::SearchBuilder is at 1.43.

[Will Maier]-----------------[willmaier@ml1.net|http://www.lfod.us/]
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support:
sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

We’re also seeing this here at bps.-----Original Message-----
From: Will Maier willmaier@ml1.net
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:35:58
To:rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] 3.6.1 search bug?

On Wed, Aug 16, 2006 at 05:46:20PM +0200, J"org Eichhorn wrote:

I also get the error ‘Unknown field: Requestor.EmailAddress’.
The debug output as suggested by David Smithson is the following:
[…]

We also get this behavior running RT 3.6.1 with Apache 2.0.58,
mod_perl 2.0.2, mod_ssl 2.0.58 and Perl 5.8.8. DBIx::SearchBuilder
is at 1.43.

[Will Maier]-----------------[willmaier@ml1.net|http://www.lfod.us/]
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sales@bestpractical.com

Discover RT’s hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com