Date Validation for a Custom Field

Currently RT Custom fields offer Mandatory, Digits, Year

I would like to create a CF which require date validation and always
ensures formatting (mm/dd/yyyy)

Is this something that must be done at the Perl level or can it be
done via online RT config CF management?

TIA

Joe
Joe Kirby , Assistant Vice President, Business Systems
Division of Information Technology (DoIT)
Support Response - http://www.umbc.edu/oit
Administration 627
Office - 410-455-3020
Email - kirby@umbc.edu

You can do this via reg exp!

Torsten

----- Originalnachricht -----Von: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com
An: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Gesendet: Fri Mar 12 20:01:43 2010
Betreff: [rt-users] Date Validation for a Custom Field

Currently RT Custom fields offer Mandatory, Digits, Year

I would like to create a CF which require date validation and always
ensures formatting (mm/dd/yyyy)

Is this something that must be done at the Perl level or can it be
done via online RT config CF management?

TIA

Joe
Joe Kirby , Assistant Vice President, Business Systems
Division of Information Technology (DoIT)
Support Response - http://www.umbc.edu/oit
Administration 627
Office - 410-455-3020
Email - kirby@umbc.edu

Kuehne + Nagel (AG & Co.) KG, Geschaeftsleitung: Hans-Georg Brinkmann (Vors.), Dirk Blesius, Reiner Heiken, Bruno Mang, Alfred Manke, Christian Marnetté, Mark Reinhardt, Jens Wollesen, Rainer Wunn, Sitz: Bremen, Registergericht: Bremen, HRA 21928, USt-IdNr.: DE 812773878, Persoenlich haftende Gesellschaft: Kuehne & Nagel A.G., Sitz: Contern/Luxemburg Geschaeftsfuehrender Verwaltungsrat: Klaus-Michael Kuehne

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

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

2010 RT Training Sessions!
San Francisco, CA, USA - Feb 22 & 23
Dublin, Ireland - Mar 15 & 16
Boston, MA, USA - April 5 & 6
Washington DC, USA - Oct 25 & 26

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

You can do this via reg exp!
You can do formatting, but not validation without some extended/experimental
RE features resulting in a hairy expression.

02/31/2010 anyone?

Cambridge Energy Alliance: Save money. Save the planet.

Currently RT Custom fields offer Mandatory, Digits, Year

I would like to create a CF which require date validation and always
ensures formatting (mm/dd/yyyy)

Is this something that must be done at the Perl level or can it be
done via online RT config CF management?

You can also patch to have support for Date Customfields (with working
search like other RT date fields):

http://rt3.fsck.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=8721&user=guest&pass=guest

Hi Emmanuel,
just saw this patch is against 3.8.6, does this mean it is included in
3.8.7/8?

Torsten2010/3/13 Emmanuel Lacour elacour@easter-eggs.com

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 02:01:43PM -0500, Joe Kirby wrote:

Currently RT Custom fields offer Mandatory, Digits, Year

I would like to create a CF which require date validation and always
ensures formatting (mm/dd/yyyy)

Is this something that must be done at the Perl level or can it be
done via online RT config CF management?

You can also patch to have support for Date Customfields (with working
search like other RT date fields):

http://rt3.fsck.com/Ticket/Display.html?id=8721&user=guest&pass=guest


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

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

2010 RT Training Sessions!
San Francisco, CA, USA - Feb 22 & 23
Dublin, Ireland - Mar 15 & 16
Boston, MA, USA - April 5 & 6
Washington DC, USA - Oct 25 & 26

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

MFG

Torsten Brumm

http://www.brumm.me

Hi Emmanuel,
just saw this patch is against 3.8.6, does this mean it is included in
3.8.7/8?

3.8.7, no

3.8.8, not yet (@BPS, many users want it, anyone to review it?)

Hi Emmanuel,
just saw this patch is against 3.8.6, does this mean it is included in
3.8.7/8?

3.8.7, no

3.8.8, not yet (@BPS, many users want it, anyone to review it?)

Last I recall, ruslan had some concerns about … searching, maybe?