To all on this worn-out subject,
I've been in this business for almost 40 years and I've heard
complaints from geeks to freaks to dummies in huge, large, small,
micro-small, and medium environments (there is no such thing as
"normal", in ANY context) about their software not doing enough for
them. No one ever seems to be completely happy with what they have. Wow!
Big surprise! They have to put up with a little difficulty or
work-around or inconvenience. Too bad, so sad. Life is tough and we all
have to put up with inconveniences and things not working the way we
want them to. All right already. This discussion has taken on the
proportions of a religious philosophy and is getting boring. RT
communication on tickets works well enough to get the job done either in
self-service or web-based. We use both. If someone doesn't want to use
web-based RT for their E_mail replies or correspondence, then they can
use MSIE or FIREFOX or WHATEVER they want and just reference the ticket
number. They can save any draft they want to and send it later. RT will
accept the E_mail when it gets it and put it in the ticket history, job
done. RT developers are not going to (I hope not, anyway) spend huge
amounts of time creating a new type of browser/mail-interface when what
they have does the job well enough now. Let's move on to FEATURES like
project planning/management, etc.
Sorry if my attitude has offended anyone but I read RT-User E_mails
daily and when half of them are pounding a philosophical discussion into
the ground (instead of sharing current technical problem-solving
involving code, permissions, etc.), I grow weary. The question initially
was for suggestions on technical features, not for a philosophical
debate ad infinitum. Maybe I've lost some patience in my old age. ;-)
Kenn
LBNL
Robert Grasso wrote:
Comparing a internet browser to a word processor makes no sense. Perhaps
your users should be composing their replies in a text editor if they
are losing their form posting content so often.
sorry as I did not recognize the subject at first - please refer to my previous
answer today (using subject : RT 4)
our support staffers don't lose their posts. They are afraid they can lose
them, and this is enough for normal people to ask for
some form of protection. Now, if you say : "Comparing a internet browser to a word
processor makes no sense" : should we say that we
should not have "normal" people (non-IT people) using RT ?
Now, up to what point are you right ? See Wikipedia technology for writing
articles : it's beginning to be feature-rich ? so
enhanced editing seems to be possible even with a browser ? I guess that their "Show
preview" is not so far from the feature I am
asking for RT.
Maybe we should have an official position from the RT developers : is RT
definitely for geeks ? normal people keep out ? what is the
comunity opinion ?
---
Robert GRASSO
System Engineer
CEDRAT
15, Chemin de Malacher - Inovallee - 38246 MEYLAN Cedex - FRANCE
Tel: +33 (0)4 76 90 50 45 Fax: +33 (0)4 76 90 16 09
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
Support service : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Commercial service : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web site : http://www.cedrat.com
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
_______________________________________________
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
