Gordon Rowell wrote:
> It may not be useful in this scenario, but it is very useful when using
> RT for customer support requests. The support team can comment on
> requests without them going to the requestor. A "proper" response can be
> sent to the requestor when the support team has decided such a response
> is ready to be sent.

I should have been more precise.  Everything you say is true.  The annoying
thing to me is that the *default* value is "correspondence" and not "comment to
requester" as I find the latter much more likely to be the correct choice.  In
the initial phase of any helpdesk request, there is likely to be at least a few
rounds of trying to figure out what the user meant (not in this case).  Only
when sufficient information has been gained to start working the problem is
there likely to be a need for internal communications.

We use a commercial helpdesk package in-house (HelpStar) which has several ways
to partition the ticket.  The nice thing about it is that the "reply to sender"
choice is sticky; once you are done diagnosing, you can flip that off and route
the ticket to the correct person and the end user doesn't get confused by the
messy details.  This feature alone would make RT more useful in my estimation.

I've been talking about running RT in-house for some of the "shared mailbox"
accounts (sales queries, webmaster stuff).  If I do, I may wind up ginning up
some support for doing it that way...

John

-- 
John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4720 Boston Way
Lanham, MD 20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5747

Reply via email to