Walt,
I understand where you’re coming from on this. It took me a long time to
get my head around RT, and I think you’re similarly technical.
The html::mason aspect of it is something I haven’t really delved into it,
since I don’t need to radically customise the interface.
You’re right that the documentation isn’t as great as it could be (for 2.0
at least, I haven’t really worked with 3.0 yet)
I stuck with trying to get RT working because so many people suggested it
to me, peoples who’s opinions I respected.
I’ve not seen any other freeware tool out there that comes close to the
abilities of RT. Thats why I’ve gone from being a frustrated systems guy
ready to throw it out the window, to being a huge RT advocate.
Stick with it a little longer… if you have any specific questions, send
me an email. Apologies, but with workload lately I haven’t been watching
this list much. I’ve always had great responses from key members on the
list though, once I figured out the basics. Once again, I agree that the
barrier to entry could be significantly lowered 
Cheers,
AlOn Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Walt Reed wrote:
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:58:00 -0400
From: Walt Reed rt@linuxguy.com
To: “Sullivan, Robert (HQP)” Robert.Sullivan@rhi.com
Cc: ‘Walt Reed’ rt@linuxguy.com, rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Abandoning RT Not for the faint of heart
Hmm. I had no intention of slamming anyone. If anything, pointing out
that the documentation is very weak should help prompt someone to fix
it. I am attempting to give constructive criticism. I posted quite a few
messages and only received one response by someone who wasn’t able to
help (no fault on his part…) An inhouse Mason expert who has
developed dozens of large-scale mason-based applications could’t figure
the thing out after spending several days on it.
I was perfectly willing to work with anyone to try and figure out what
went wrong, but nobody with the right expertise stepped up to the plate.
BTW, I compile all my apps by hand - I’m no stranger to tough manual
configurations. It’s VERY rare that I find something I can’t work with.
I even recompiled apache, perl, and mod_perl on a new machine to attempt
to get this thing going with the exact same problem.
If you like RT and are able to get it to work, Great! Don’t switch. If
like me you can’t get the thing to go, there are other alternatives -
you don’t have to keep bashing your head into a brick wall.
On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:24:28AM -0700, Sullivan, Robert (HQP) said:
Hi,
While RT is not an easy program to get up and running and all evaluations of
it say that it is not an easy install. The tool does work and work well. I
agree that it would be nice if it was packaged and one could do a simple
pkgadd. Also I think that Jesse and the rest of the users on this list do a
very good job of helping out whene there are questions. I do not blame you
for going with another product but I think it is a mistake to slam the users
and author of the RT program.
-----Original Message-----
From: Walt Reed [mailto:rt@linuxguy.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:13 AM
To: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: [rt-users] Abandoning RT
Well, after spending several days trying to get it to work, and trying
to debug the code, I decided to abandon my efforts to install RT. This
is too bad because from a feature / demo perspective, RT looks great.
Unfortuantely, the documentation is very weak, the code seems
convoluted, and there doesn’t seem to be a good way to debug the thing.
The bottom line is that it just doesn’t work.
I see a few other people struggling to get it working too. If you are
one of those people, you may want to check out http://otrs.org/ which
seems competitive, works, and seems to be currently maintained.
rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Have you read the FAQ? The RT FAQ Manager lives at http://fsck.com/rtfm
rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Have you read the FAQ? The RT FAQ Manager lives at http://fsck.com/rtfm