Hi,
The direction of priority from 0 - 99 and consequently the escalation process does not fit with our model and I would like to change it so that 0 is highest is this possible.
Regards Simon
Simon Dray
Customer Support Engineering
ANT Software Limited
Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WZ, UK
Tel: +44 1223 716400
Dir: +44 1223 716476
Email: simon.dray@antplc.commailto:simon.dray@antplc.com
- ANT LEGAL DISCLAIMER *
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. They may contain legally privileged information, and may not be disclosed to anyone else. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete all copies from your system.
ANT plc and ANT Software Limited are registered in the United Kingdom at Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom. The registered number for ANT plc is 5372859 and for ANT Software Limited is 2822565.
The direction of priority from 0 – 99 and consequently the escalation
process does not fit with our model and I would like to change it so that 0
is highest is this possible.
I would start-off with one of the patches for using textual priorities.
It’d certainly be easy to have “High” be 0-20 and “Low” as 60-80,
but you might be able to extend this to backwards numbers without
much difficulty. Honestly though. I’m not aware of too much in RT that
makes any real assumptions about priorities. Escalation is something
you add, and it’s simply a matter of flipping the sign of an operation
to have it work as you want…
Cambridge Energy Alliance: Save money. Save the planet.
Simon,
I concur with Jerrad. We use the numbers 1 thru 5 with 1 being
emergency, etc. We’ve been on RT for 3 years and haven’t seen any code
or process that uses any native sequencing of the priority field. I
believe you can write your own progression and promotion sequences on
your own in a cron job. Hope this helps.
Kenn
LBNLOn 4/2/2009 8:31 AM, Jerrad Pierce wrote:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 04:59, Simon Dray Simon.Dray@antplc.com wrote:
The direction of priority from 0 � 99 and consequently the escalation
process does not fit with our model and I would like to change it so that 0
is highest is this possible.
I would start-off with one of the patches for using textual priorities.
It’d certainly be easy to have “High” be 0-20 and “Low” as 60-80,
but you might be able to extend this to backwards numbers without
much difficulty. Honestly though. I’m not aware of too much in RT that
makes any real assumptions about priorities. Escalation is something
you add, and it’s simply a matter of flipping the sign of an operation
to have it work as you want…