Suggestions for 1.0.6


#1

Greetings.

First off, thanks for RT! We’ve used the original ANL “req” system
before, but RT has many of the features that we found lacking in the
original system. We’re quite happy with it!

I have a few suggestions for future releases (I don’t know what’s
happening with 2.0, so forgive me if these are already in the works):

  1. It would be good to have a few “refresh” buttons/links on the
    Transaction History details page. That is, one at the top and one at the
    bottom would probably be sufficient. The purpose of this button/link is
    simply to refresh the page and show any new transactions on that request.
    This may be necessary for requests that have a high volume of activity, or
    if you let your browser sit on the transaction history page for a while
    and you know that new transactions have occurred during that time. Right
    now, you have to go out to the queue listing and re-select the specific
    request to see new activity.

It is not always safe to just hit the browser reload button since your
last action may have posted a comment, sent a reply, or some other action.
Hence, a simple “refresh” link/button would be really handy.

  1. By the same token, it would be helpful to see the request number in a
    few more places than just at the very top of the transation history page.
    For requests that have a really long transaction history (i.e., anything
    more than a single screenfull), you have to scroll back up to the top of
    the page to see the request number.

  2. We have noticed that you can’t resolve a ticket with %RT e-mail
    commands in a reply message – you have to do it in a separate "action"
    e-mail. For example, say I’m a member of a list and I get an e-mail with
    a new request. I reply right away, and put in it:

“Hi user, here’s the solution to your problem… yadda, yadda, yadda.
%RT user myusername
%RT pass mypassword
%RT take number
%RT resolve number”

RT will process everything properly, and it will even mark the status of
the request as “resolved”. But then it will send the reply e-mail, which
RT then interprets as re-opening the request (you get an “Status changed
to open by _rt_system” entry in the transaction history). You can only
resolve the request by sending a second e-mail to the action address.

Perhaps this is by design; I’m not sure. It would just be convenient to
be able to answer and resolve a request with a single e-mail.

Just my $0.02.

Finally, could someone post a summarized list of features of things that
we can expect in 2.0? That would be really helpful (I wasn’t able to get
the CVS copy working properly, but I’m curious to know what’s
up-n-coming).

Thanks again!

{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} squyres@cse.nd.edu
{+} Perpetual Obsessive Notre Dame Student Craving Utter Madness
{+} “I came to ND for 4 years and ended up staying for a decade”


#2

In a message dated: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 16:47:40 EST
Jeff Squyres said:

For example, say I’m a member of a list and I get an e-mail with
a new request. I reply right away, and put in it:

“Hi user, here’s the solution to your problem… yadda, yadda, yadda.
%RT user myusername
%RT pass mypassword
%RT take number
%RT resolve number”

Quick question about these commands, are these placed in a special header like
the old req system used to with an X-Request-do: header, or in the body of the
e-mail itself?

Thanks,
Seeya,
Paul
I’m in shape, my shape just happens to be pear!

 If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!

#3

Put the mailgate commands in the Body.

Cheers,
Billy Gunn
Unix Sys Admin
Interadnet, Inc.
919-657-4350From: Paul Lussier [mailto:pll@mclinux.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 05, 2000 9:28 AM
To: Jeff Squyres
Cc: rt-users@lists.fsck.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] Suggestions for 1.0.6

In a message dated: Mon, 04 Dec 2000 16:47:40 EST
Jeff Squyres said:

For example, say I’m a member of a list and I get an e-mail with
a new request. I reply right away, and put in it:

“Hi user, here’s the solution to your problem… yadda, yadda, yadda.
%RT user myusername
%RT pass mypassword
%RT take number
%RT resolve number”

Quick question about these commands, are these placed in a special header
like
the old req system used to with an X-Request-do: header, or in the body of
the
e-mail itself?

Thanks,
Seeya,
Paul
I’m in shape, my shape just happens to be pear!

 If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!

rt-users mailing list
rt-users@lists.fsck.com
http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users


#4

“Hi user, here’s the solution to your problem… yadda, yadda, yadda.
%RT user myusername
%RT pass mypassword
%RT take number
%RT resolve number”

Quick question about these commands, are these placed in a special
header like the old req system used to with an X-Request-do: header,
or in the body of the e-mail itself?

As noted by Billy Gunn, these commands are in the body itself. Quite
handy, actually – it allows you to do arbitrary actions from any mail
client.

{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} squyres@cse.nd.edu
{+} Perpetual Obsessive Notre Dame Student Craving Utter Madness
{+} “I came to ND for 4 years and ended up staying for a decade”