Yes, I believe that’s what she wants: she wants to force RT to prompt
for a comment transaction to automagically accompany the queue change
On reflection, it seems to me that the easiest way to accomplish
that, since the queue in which a ticket lives seems only to be able to
be changed in the GUI from Basics and Jumbo, is to further restrict it
only to the Jumbo screen, and modify the code which catches it to throw
an error on Queue changes unless the comment field has contents in it.
I’m not enough of an RT hacker to know how practical such a change to
the code is, but this sort of speaks to where I was originally going
with ticket-tracking design before I found RT, which is that every
transaction automatically has fields for both private and public
comment, regardless of what sort of transaction it is.
Yes, this would be an improvement IMHO. I really think it is better to
offer the user an opportunity to comment even if it goes unused much of
the time. The database size change would be minimal and the benefit
would be great. Our situation is that we transfer tickets back and forth
between queues to pass them off for the next stage of work. Sure, I can
go and add a comment to tell them what stage was just completed and what
was done by whom, but it seems to me that wanting to do so would be more
the rule than the exception. Is my intended usage so unusual?
Well, clearly I don’t think so, but I do not comprise the entire set
of users of RT.
So, a poll:
When you make status changes to a ticket (current queue, owner,
priority, etc), do you add a related comment
- Almost always
- Almost never
(I’ve unthreaded this message so no one misses it.)
If you can read this... thank a system administrator. Or two. --me