Bug or feature? Unpriviledged users see first article via webinterface

Hi,

I was wondering if it is possible to allow a priviledged user to start a ticket as type "comment"
instead type “reply”. We are using 4.0.0 and I haven’t seen anything like this in the changelog of
4.0.{1,2}.

We have the following problem:

Sometimes we open a new ticket (i.e. “New ticket in …” button) without a Requestor on the
ticket, we then usually write an internal starting comment as ticket kick off. This text which we
want to be an internal comment is internally saved by RT as type “Reply”.

So if we later on add a Requestor to the ticket and give that requestor unpriviledged access to the
RT webinterface, he will be able to see the initial text which was supposed to be an internal
comment. So limiting the initial ticket opening process to the “reply” type seems to be somewhat
inflexible.

Having the ability to pick in between “comment” and “reply” when opening a new ticket via the
webinterface would be very, very helpful.

Until now we always create new tickets just with the text “Ticket creation”, and then add a comment.
But this is very annoying.

Is there just an option/right I have missed to set correctly?

Regards,

Lars

Hi,

I was wondering if it is possible to allow a priviledged user to start a ticket as type "comment"
instead type “reply”. We are using 4.0.0 and I haven’t seen anything like this in the changelog of
4.0.{1,2}.

We have the following problem:

Sometimes we open a new ticket (i.e. “New ticket in …” button) without a Requestor on the
ticket, we then usually write an internal starting comment as ticket kick off. This text which we
want to be an internal comment is internally saved by RT as type “Reply”.

So if we later on add a Requestor to the ticket and give that requestor unpriviledged access to the
RT webinterface, he will be able to see the initial text which was supposed to be an internal
comment. So limiting the initial ticket opening process to the “reply” type seems to be somewhat
inflexible.

Having the ability to pick in between “comment” and “reply” when opening a new ticket via the
webinterface would be very, very helpful.

Until now we always create new tickets just with the text “Ticket creation”, and then add a comment.
But this is very annoying.

Is there just an option/right I have missed to set correctly?

RT considers Create to be a correspondence (reply). There’s an
extension, possibly not yet open sourced, to add a Comment box to the
Create page so that while opening a ticket you can also leave an
internal comment.

-kevin

Hi,

I was wondering if it is possible to allow a priviledged user to start a ticket as type
"comment" instead type “reply”. We are using 4.0.0 and I haven’t seen anything like this in
the changelog of 4.0.{1,2}.

We have the following problem:

Sometimes we open a new ticket (i.e. “New ticket in …” button) without a Requestor on
the ticket, we then usually write an internal starting comment as ticket kick off. This text
which we want to be an internal comment is internally saved by RT as type “Reply”.

So if we later on add a Requestor to the ticket and give that requestor unpriviledged access
to the RT webinterface, he will be able to see the initial text which was supposed to be an
internal comment. So limiting the initial ticket opening process to the “reply” type seems to
be somewhat inflexible.

Having the ability to pick in between “comment” and “reply” when opening a new ticket via
the webinterface would be very, very helpful.

Until now we always create new tickets just with the text “Ticket creation”, and then add a
comment. But this is very annoying.

Is there just an option/right I have missed to set correctly?

RT considers Create to be a correspondence (reply). There’s an extension, possibly not yet
open sourced, to add a Comment box to the Create page so that while opening a ticket you can
also leave an internal comment.

-kevin

Hi Kevin,

thanks for pointing that out. I just noticed that Ruslan replied to me off-list, so we were
already talking about that.

He noted, that one might run into problems, when a ticket starts with something else than type
"Create". Do you think this is not an issue?

Another option, probably the best at the moment in order to fix already present tickets with
intended comments in the intitial ticket create, would be to copy the initial attachment of the
Create type into a new attachment and add a new transaction with the time of the Create
transaction +1 second. After that the initial create attachment could be cleared.
As far as I can see it works fine, because the transactions are sorted by timestamp and not by ID.
Is this something that might change in the future?

Lars

thanks for pointing that out. I just noticed that Ruslan replied to me off-list, so we were
already talking about that.

He noted, that one might run into problems, when a ticket starts with something else than type
"Create". Do you think this is not an issue?

You still want a Create action. It is possible to have a Create
action with no content (which is what the extension I referred to
would allow).

Another option, probably the best at the moment in order to fix already present tickets with
intended comments in the intitial ticket create, would be to copy the initial attachment of the
Create type into a new attachment and add a new transaction with the time of the Create
transaction +1 second. After that the initial create attachment could be cleared.
As far as I can see it works fine, because the transactions are sorted by timestamp and not by ID.
Is this something that might change in the future?

That sounds like a lot of surgery. Be careful. It’s impossible to
guarantee or warranty that a large amount of tweaking in the database
like that won’t cause problems.

-kevin