I don’t like idea that somebody can change statuses set.
If it would be then it would be in 3.2.x or even more in 3.4.x, but now
with ‘Advanced RT Search Builder’ we can construct complex queries on CFs.
As I can see it also allow customize output of search results and save
I think there is few steps needed to meet required flexibilty in this area:
- Add ability to modify ticket’s CFs on reply/comment/resolve… actions.
- Add ability to put saved searches on own home page.
- Add ability to output CFs in search results.
I agree that with our organisation, if our custom fields were as available
as the status field, it would solve our problem. I am not sure this would
solve the problem for everyone, however, since there is the special
handling attached to states which might be more heavily used by some
(we don’t use anything beyond ‘open’ and ‘resolved’).
Having custom fields available on the basic update ticket and in the
initial searches would (for us) be more useful than being able to select
a status, because then we would be able to use other custom fields as
we like, instead of just a status custom field.
I guess what I’m thinking of is along the lines of RTFM custom fields.
If, alongside the queue-based custom fields, there were also global
custom fields in the style of RTFM, and these fields were available in
the default search before the queue is selected, I think that all
the comments I receive concerning status types would be ended. I’d
also like to be able to set defaults for custom fields and require a
value for a field, but these are other matters.
Another advantage for me in global custom fields would be that I wouldn’t
have to run a script to create the field whenever I create a queue. Note
that I’m not suggesting global custom fields replace queue-based ones,
because we often also have fields with the same names but different choices
in different queues.
So, in light of what Ruslan says, I’m more in favor of a greater integration
of custom fields over the modification of status names. Although I guess
both would be nice, now that I think about it more fully, the custom
field integration would give wider benefits, at least for us.