Hi All,
I’ve looked around this list but don’t seem to have found a solution to
my problem so I wonder if anyone can help.
I’m running RT 3.4.2 on FC3. The IT department consists of only my
supervisor and myself who are both on the admincc list. When either of
us create a ticket we get 2 copies mailed of each transaction since we
are then both requestors and admincc. Would I need to mod the
oncorrespond scrip with a conditional to send only one mail in the event
that an email address is repeated or is there a better/simpler way?
I’ve never written a line of perl…
I can change the list of recipients when corresponding via the RT web
interface but would like to stop this behaviour from the outset so email
alone can be used.
Thanks
Search in archives. You need scrip that notifies requestors and aminccs at once.On 12/29/05, Paul O’Rorke paul@paulororke.net wrote:
Hi All,
I’ve looked around this list but don’t seem to have found a solution to
my problem so I wonder if anyone can help.
I’m running RT 3.4.2 on FC3. The IT department consists of only my
supervisor and myself who are both on the admincc list. When either of
us create a ticket we get 2 copies mailed of each transaction since we
are then both requestors and admincc. Would I need to mod the
oncorrespond scrip with a conditional to send only one mail in the event
that an email address is repeated or is there a better/simpler way?
I’ve never written a line of perl…
I can change the list of recipients when corresponding via the RT web
interface but would like to stop this behaviour from the outset so email
alone can be used.
Thanks
The rt-users Archives
Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
WE’RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in Amsterdam, Boston and
San Francisco - Find out more at http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html
Best regards, Ruslan.
The current (default) scrip is notifying both. I was hoping to find a
solution without modding or writing scrips…
Ruslan Zakirov wrote:
Request Tracker Wiki 12/30/05, Paul O’Rorke paul@paulororke.net wrote:
The current (default) scrip is notifying both. I was hoping to find a
solution without modding or writing scrips…
Ruslan Zakirov wrote:
Search in archives. You need scrip that notifies requestors and aminccs at once.
On 12/29/05, Paul O’Rorke paul@paulororke.net wrote:
Hi All,
I’ve looked around this list but don’t seem to have found a solution to
my problem so I wonder if anyone can help.
I’m running RT 3.4.2 on FC3. The IT department consists of only my
supervisor and myself who are both on the admincc list. When either of
us create a ticket we get 2 copies mailed of each transaction since we
are then both requestors and admincc. Would I need to mod the
oncorrespond scrip with a conditional to send only one mail in the event
that an email address is repeated or is there a better/simpler way?
I’ve never written a line of perl…
I can change the list of recipients when corresponding via the RT web
interface but would like to stop this behaviour from the outset so email
alone can be used.
Thanks
The rt-users Archives
Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
WE’RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in Amsterdam, Boston and
San Francisco - Find out more at http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html
–
Best regards, Ruslan.
The rt-users Archives
Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
WE’RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in Amsterdam, Boston and
San Francisco - Find out more at http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html
Best regards, Ruslan.
Hi Everyone,
Sometimes when a ticket is created, the original requester will “copy”
another party on a subsequent reply. But, instead of using the CC field,
they add the person to the “TO” field. Now when the new person replies,
clicking “Reply” in their email client just puts the requester’s address
in the “TO” field (as it should). But, the second person decides to
also add the support address to the “TO” field. What happens next is
that the original requester gets a copy from the second person, AND gets
a copy from RT.
If that didn’t make sense, here’s the sequence:
- Email to support
- RT auto replies
- Requester replies TO: support@foo.com, newguy@dude.com
-
newguy@dude.com replies TO: support@foo.com, requester@bar.com
-
requester@bar.com gets email from newguy@dude.com
- RT sends copy of newguy@dude.com email to requester@bar.com
Effect: requester@bar.com gets two copies of the same email.
Even with $ParseNewMessageForTicketCcs enabled, I still see the double
emails. But, this might not be the problem since I’m not sure if
$ParseNewMessageForTicketCc is supposed to handle this case.
If the second person had just clicked “Reply to All”, only the
support@foo.com address would have been used, and then the requester
would only get one copy of the email.
Is it possible to make RT parse the “TO” field? Have I misconfigured
something?
Thanks in advance,
Ranbir
Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu
Linux 2.6.14-1.1656_FC4 i686 GNU/Linux
10:19:11 up 3:18, 3 users, load average: 0.08, 0.12, 0.16
At Monday 1/30/2006 10:52 AM, Kanwar Ranbir Sandhu wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Sometimes when a ticket is created, the original requester will “copy”
another party on a subsequent reply. But, instead of using the CC field,
they add the person to the “TO” field. Now when the new person replies,
clicking “Reply” in their email client just puts the requester’s address
in the “TO” field (as it should). But, the second person decides to
also add the support address to the “TO” field. What happens next is
that the original requester gets a copy from the second person, AND gets
a copy from RT.
I think the problem is outside RT - the same thing will probably happen if
you’re on a mailing list and someone includes both you and the mailing list
on a message.
Does it really happen that frequently?
Steve