Definition on rt-mailgate


#1

Hello,

I still have some problem on mailgate and found I made a mistake on the
use of /etc/aliases. But it is stll unclear to me the three definition;


red# ./rt-mailgate --help

RT Mailgate works in two modes. ‘Traditional’ and ‘Extended Sytax’

Traditional mode:

rt-mailgate

is the full name of one of your RT queues. if it’s got any
spaces in it, it should be quoted.

is one of ‘comment’, ‘correspond’ and ‘action’

comment means that any mail sent through this gateway will be logged
as private comments

correspond means that any mail sent through this gateway will be
treateded as mail to or from the requestor. If you want tickets to be
autocreated through this interface, comment is the right choice.

action is for rt’s mail action mode.


What is the definite difference between ‘comment’, ‘correspond’ and
’action’?

TIA


Kazu Kimura kimura@ctc.ad.jp
IP Network Engineering, CTC
Phone +81-52-740-8101
Fax +81-52-740-8935



#2

This description is correct with one error. As RT ships "correspond"
are the only aliases that allow creation of tickets. Therefore the
sentence “comment is the right choice” should say “correspond is the
right choice”.

Any of the three RT action types can process %RT commands. E.g., an
email of the form:

%RT USER myusername
%RT PASS mypassword
%RT TAKE 16

will “take” item 16, whatever is specified in the mail alias.

The functional difference that the argument makes is that it
determines what happens to the plain text in the message.

An ‘action’ argument causes rt-mailgate to ignore any plain text in
the message (I think you get an error). The subject line of the
message must reference an actual case in the database.

A ‘comment’ argument causes rt-mailgate to treat the plain text as a
comment, as if you had entered a new comment in the web interface. As
with ‘action’ arguments, the subject must reference the case on which
you are commenting.

A ‘correspond’ argument causes rt-mailgate to treat the plain text as
a reply (i.e., sends a message to the requestor as well as queue
members). If the subject line of the message does not reference a
case in the database, then a new case is created – if allowed by the
queue – using the information in the email (requestor is read from
the “From:” line, etc.).

— Eric


#3

This description is correct with one error. As RT ships "correspond"
are the only aliases that allow creation of tickets. Therefore the
sentence “comment is the right choice” should say “correspond is the
right choice”.

Indeed it should. sorry about that. It’ll be that way in 1.0.5
jesse reed vincent – root@eruditorum.orgjesse@fsck.com
70EBAC90: 2A07 FC22 7DB4 42C1 9D71 0108 41A3 3FB3 70EB AC90

“Mary had a crypto key / She kept it in escrow
And everything that Mary said / The Feds were sure to know” – Sam Simpson


#4

Hello Eric,

Thank you for the clarification.
However, concerning the usage, it is still vague to me.

Will somebody answer to me with following example. In fact, the use of
mail is not yet successful. I cannot say if my understanding is wrong
or my RT installation is wrong.

Assumption: to make it simple, I set /etc/aliases for rt as follows.

use for RT

comment: "|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN comment"
action: "|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN action"
correspond: “|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN correspond”

(1)To open a request, is following valid.

host% mailx correspond@red.stf.ctc.ad.jp
%rt user kimura
%rt pass kimura

test if new request is opened.

.

EOT

Result:Two message are sent back.
(i)Thank you for taking some action:

%rt user kimura
RT: Username kimura noticed.
pass ***** RT: You are now authenticated as kimura.

-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker
(ii)There has been an error:
There has been an error with your request:
You don’t have permission to create requests in this queue

Your message is reproduced below:

test if new request is opened.

.

Q1. With Web interface, user “kimura” is designated as Admin. Why is
this rejected?

(2)To add a comment, is following valid?
host% mailx comment@red.stf.ctc.ad.jp
%rt user kimura
%rt pass kimura
%rt open 3

Need vendor investigation.
.

Result:Two messages are sent back.
(i)
-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker
(no contents)

(ii)There has been an error:

You did not specify a ticket number for these comments. Please resubmit them
with a ticket number. Your comments appear below.

Need vendor investigation.
.
Q2. It seems the way to specify ticket number was wrong. How ?

There are more things that are vague or not accepted by RT. But today,
I will restrict up to these.

I think mail interface is important. If somebody knows examples of how
to use mail interface, I need it or would like to know where I can get
it.

Thanks and best regards,


Kazu Kimura kimura@ctc.ad.jp
IP Network Engineering, CTC
Phone +81-52-740-8101
Fax +81-52-740-8935



#5

In response to Q1:

I don’t think the correspond queue uses the username/password you
give it for the correspondence. That is, the

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura

only authenticates you for further %RT commands. I think the new
request is still tying to be created by an anonymous user, and you
probably have “allow anyone to create requests in this queue” turned
off.

In Q2 it’s the same thing.

The sequence

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3

sets the “status” of item 3 to open; it does not “open up” item 3 for
"further manipulation". Specifically, it does not cause the following
email to be associated with request #3. As I understand it, the only
way to get the plain text comment associated to request 3 is to use
the subject line.

E.g.:

# mail comment@...

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3  [Opens ticket 3 as user kimura]

Test comment [This comment will be associated w/ticket
	     #4 because of the subject line of the message].

— Eric

At 3:11 PM +0900 11/1/2000, Kazu Kimura wrote:


#6

Hello,

a genneral question on this topic:

what ist this mailgate good for?
if i issue “%rt help” i see that there is no option to list
open tickets or transaction content.

to take the example “%RT OPEN 3”:
how should i decide which ticket nr. to be opend if i don’t know the
content?

robertOn Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Eric Goodman wrote:

In response to Q1:

I don’t think the correspond queue uses the username/password you
give it for the correspondence. That is, the

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura

only authenticates you for further %RT commands. I think the new
request is still tying to be created by an anonymous user, and you
probably have “allow anyone to create requests in this queue” turned
off.

In Q2 it’s the same thing.

The sequence

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3

sets the “status” of item 3 to open; it does not “open up” item 3 for
"further manipulation". Specifically, it does not cause the following
email to be associated with request #3. As I understand it, the only
way to get the plain text comment associated to request 3 is to use
the subject line.

E.g.:

mail comment@…

Subject: [RT Request #4] (CTCN) Transaction (kimura)
%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3 [Opens ticket 3 as user kimura]

Test comment [This comment will be associated w/ticket
#4 because of the subject line of the message].

— Eric

At 3:11 PM +0900 11/1/2000, Kazu Kimura wrote:

Hello Eric,

Thank you for the clarification.
However, concerning the usage, it is still vague to me.

Will somebody answer to me with following example. In fact, the use of
mail is not yet successful. I cannot say if my understanding is wrong
or my RT installation is wrong.

Assumption: to make it simple, I set /etc/aliases for rt as follows.

use for RT

comment: "|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN comment"
action: "|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN action"
correspond: “|/opt/rt/bin/rt-mailgate CTCN correspond”

(1)To open a request, is following valid.

host% mailx correspond@red.stf.ctc.ad.jp
Subject: test 1
%rt user kimura
%rt pass kimura

test if new request is opened.

.

EOT

Result:Two message are sent back.
(i)Thank you for taking some action:

%rt user kimura
RT: Username kimura noticed.
pass ***** RT: You are now authenticated as kimura.

-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker
(ii)There has been an error:
There has been an error with your request:
You don’t have permission to create requests in this queue

Your message is reproduced below:

test if new request is opened.

.

Q1. With Web interface, user “kimura” is designated as Admin. Why is
this rejected?

(2)To add a comment, is following valid?
host% mailx comment@red.stf.ctc.ad.jp
Subject: router crash
%rt user kimura
%rt pass kimura
%rt open 3

Need vendor investigation.
.

Result:Two messages are sent back.
(i)
-------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker
(no contents)

(ii)There has been an error:

You did not specify a ticket number for these comments. Please resubmit them
with a ticket number. Your comments appear below.

Need vendor investigation.
.
Q2. It seems the way to specify ticket number was wrong. How ?

There are more things that are vague or not accepted by RT. But today,
I will restrict up to these.

I think mail interface is important. If somebody knows examples of how
to use mail interface, I need it or would like to know where I can get
it.

Thanks and best regards,


Kazu Kimura kimura@ctc.ad.jp
IP Network Engineering, CTC
Phone +81-52-740-8101
Fax +81-52-740-8935



rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users


rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

di. robert rotman inode.graz
phone -> ++43-(0)316 813141 ++43-(0)316 818600/15 <- fax
rotman@inode.at http://www.graz.inode.at/
while (!sleep) { $sheep++ }


#7

In response to Q1:

I don’t think the correspond queue uses the username/password you
give it for the correspondence. That is, the

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura

only authenticates you for further %RT commands. I think the new
request is still tying to be created by an anonymous user, and you
probably have “allow anyone to create requests in this queue” turned
off.
I already turned on.

Without username/password, it reject my request because of no permission. So, still NG.

In Q2 it’s the same thing.

The sequence

%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3

sets the “status” of item 3 to open; it does not “open up” item 3 for
"further manipulation". Specifically, it does not cause the following
email to be associated with request #3. As I understand it, the only
way to get the plain text comment associated to request 3 is to use
the subject line.

E.g.:

mail comment@…

Subject: [RT Request #4] (CTCN) Transaction (kimura)
%RT USER kimura
%RT PASS kimura
%RT OPEN 3 [Opens ticket 3 as user kimura]

Test comment [This comment will be associated w/ticket
#4 because of the subject line of the message].

I made a mistake. Yes, you are correct. Subject requires [Queue-name
#request number]. RT seems to check if this matches current request. This works fine. And there is no need to add “%rt open 3”.


Kazu Kimura kimura@ctc.ad.jp
IP Network Engineering. CTC
Phone +81-52-740-8101
Fax +81-52-740-8935



#8

Now I succeeded in creating new ticket with definitely new subject and
no RT commands in the contents sending to correspond.

Thanks Eric.


Kazu Kimura kimura@ctc.ad.jp
IP Network Engineering CTC
Phone +81-52-740-8101
Fax +81-52-740-8935