On Fri, 2006-04-14 at 14:19, John Peacock wrote: > 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 RT terms a 'comment' does not go the the requester. > 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. The way to do that in RT would be to have new requests hit a queue where where some subset of your helpdesk performs this initial dialog. Then when enough details have been added to allow resolution, move it to the queue where the people who solve problems are watchers. > 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... If you build your RT queues around the groups of people watching them and move the ticket to the appropriate queue at different times you get the same effect. -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
