RT 3.8.9 - "Subject Tag" field often blank

RT Users
1

Hi Everyone

When editing a queue I often find the “Subject Tag” field blank. The
emails vacillate between what the value should be, and what the
default is, but I am unsure whether I do anything to cause the
inconsistency.

I am busy trawling through bugs, but this is a bit of a big deal right
now (anal retentive customer) and so I am asking for help as I search.

Sincerely,

Jason Doller

2

Hi Everyone

When editing a queue I often find the “Subject Tag” field blank. The
emails vacillate between what the value should be, and what the
default is, but I am unsure whether I do anything to cause the
inconsistency.

I can just add that I see this also on 3.8.8 with MySQL at least.

Using a script to get/set SubjectTag works correctly, but not with UI.

3

Hi Everyone

When editing a queue I often find the “Subject Tag” field blank. The
emails vacillate between what the value should be, and what the
default is, but I am unsure whether I do anything to cause the
inconsistency.

I can just add that I see this also on 3.8.8 with MySQL at least.

Using a script to get/set SubjectTag works correctly, but not with UI.

This should be fixed in 6a57e9d6ce74e1d9ae991ca4399b2c73a6845d8b
We thought it was committed to 3.8 and merged forward, but it turns
out that it was committed to 4.0 and never cherry picked back.

You should be able to apply that patch manually, or it will be
include in 3.8.10

-kevin

4

Hi keven,
Is 3.8.10 released for upgrade?

Jo

Jo Keown, MBusAdmin(Mgt), PNA
IS Business Analyst
Colorado Group Ltd
100 Melbourne Street
South Brisbane QLD 4101
Ph: +61 7 3877 3399
Mobile: 0402 697 351
Email: joanne.keown@coloradogroup.com.au

Sign up to FUSION now for special member offers at 5 of Australia’s leading fashion brands.-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Falcone
Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2011 3:46 AM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT 3.8.9 - “Subject Tag” field often blank

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 05:42:33PM +0100, Emmanuel Lacour wrote:

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 07:54:14AM +0200, Jason Doller wrote:

Hi Everyone

When editing a queue I often find the “Subject Tag” field blank.
The emails vacillate between what the value should be, and what the
default is, but I am unsure whether I do anything to cause the
inconsistency.

I can just add that I see this also on 3.8.8 with MySQL at least.

Using a script to get/set SubjectTag works correctly, but not with UI.

This should be fixed in 6a57e9d6ce74e1d9ae991ca4399b2c73a6845d8b
We thought it was committed to 3.8 and merged forward, but it turns out that it was committed to 4.0 and never cherry picked back.

You should be able to apply that patch manually, or it will be include in 3.8.10

-kevin

5

No. 3.8.9 was released a few days ago. Use patch.

Regards, Ruslan. From phone.
23.02.2011 2:52 пользователь “Joanne Keown” <
Joanne.Keown@coloradogroup.com.au> написал:

Hi keven,
Is 3.8.10 released for upgrade?

Jo

Jo Keown, MBusAdmin(Mgt), PNA
IS Business Analyst
Colorado Group Ltd
100 Melbourne Street
South Brisbane QLD 4101
Ph: +61 7 3877 3399
Mobile: 0402 697 351
Email: joanne.keown@coloradogroup.com.au

Sign up to FUSION now for special member offers at 5 of Australia’s
leading fashion brands.

-----Original Message-----
From: rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:
rt-users-bounces@lists.bestpractical.com] On Behalf Of Kevin Falcone
Sent: Wednesday, 23 February 2011 3:46 AM
To: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT 3.8.9 - “Subject Tag” field often blank

Hi Everyone

When editing a queue I often find the “Subject Tag” field blank.
The emails vacillate between what the value should be, and what the
default is, but I am unsure whether I do anything to cause the
inconsistency.

I can just add that I see this also on 3.8.8 with MySQL at least.

Using a script to get/set SubjectTag works correctly, but not with UI.

This should be fixed in 6a57e9d6ce74e1d9ae991ca4399b2c73a6845d8b
We thought it was committed to 3.8 and merged forward, but it turns out
that it was committed to 4.0 and never cherry picked back.

You should be able to apply that patch manually, or it will be include in
3.8.10