[rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
Hi guys is the book published by O'Reilly still actual or too much time has passed since 2005 and the info written there are no more updated? I've seen in changelog from 3.6 to 3.8 a big step head and reading about the idea of release 4.0 during 2009 make me even more in doubt about buying it... Have you read it? Did you find it useful, or the way RT is intended to be documented nowadays is via wiki and this ML ? Thank you for your answers and opinions. cheers -- Andrea Perotti Cutaway S.r.l. c/o Seat PagineGialle email : apero...@cutaway.it www : http://www.cutaway.it smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] 10 Newest Unowned tickets i'm allowed to see
On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 08:58:33PM -0500, Rob Munsch wrote: Hello list, After some initial confusion, i realized that a user's 10 latest block gets the 10 latest tickets, and THEN filters it for what queues that user is allowed to see - sometimes resulting in 4 tickets, or 1 ticket, or no tickets at all! I'm not sure how, or if i can, change this behaviour. I'd like the 10 most recent to show 10 tickets at all times - for permissions-filtering to occur before the 10 most recent are counted. Any ideas? Depending on your RT version, you can try the following option: Set($UseSQLForACLChecks, 1); but read comment on it in RT_Config.pm before enabling it. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
Hi Andrea, i remember a threat like this some months ago and again: Yes, the book is still actual! There are many changes since 2005 but the core and most of the main features are working the same way. Torsten Kuehne + Nagel (AG Co.) KG, Geschaeftsleitung: Hans-Georg Brinkmann (Vors.), Uwe Bielang (Stellv.), Bruno Mang, Dirk Blesius (Stellv.), Alfred Manke, Christian Marnetté (Stellv.), Mark Reinhardt (Stellv.), Jens Wollesen, Rainer Wunn, Sitz: Bremen, Registergericht: Bremen, HRA 21928, USt-IdNr.: DE 812773878, Persoenlich haftende Gesellschaft: Kuehne Nagel A.G., Sitz: Contern/Luxemburg Geschaeftsfuehrender Verwaltungsrat: Klaus-Michael Kuehne -Urspruengliche Nachricht- Von: rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com [mailto:rt-users-boun...@lists.bestpractical.com] Im Auftrag von Andrea Perotti Gesendet: Donnerstag, 5. Februar 2009 10:11 An: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com Betreff: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth? Hi guys is the book published by O'Reilly still actual or too much time has passed since 2005 and the info written there are no more updated? I've seen in changelog from 3.6 to 3.8 a big step head and reading about the idea of release 4.0 during 2009 make me even more in doubt about buying it... Have you read it? Did you find it useful, or the way RT is intended to be documented nowadays is via wiki and this ML ? Thank you for your answers and opinions. cheers -- Andrea Perotti Cutaway S.r.l. c/o Seat PagineGialle email : apero...@cutaway.it www : http://www.cutaway.it ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] custom reports newbie
Hi All, I'm a newbie to custom reports. Are there any good templates floating about to start from? or any good guides to building them? Cheers, -- Calvin Chiang Network Admin Utilyx 1st Floor, 55 North Wharf Road Paddington London, W2 1LA Tel: 020 7087 8673 www.utilyx.com __ Utilyx is the trading name of Utilyx Limited and Utilyx Risk Management Limited (URML). URML is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). This message contains information that may be privileged or confidential and is the property of Utilyx. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any mistransmission. Any views or opinions expressed in this message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Utilyx. Unless otherwise stated, any pricing information given in this message is indicative only and does not constitute an offer to deal at any price quoted. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy, disseminate, distribute or use this message or any part thereof. If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete all copies of this message. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __ ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Merging 2 RT systems
Hi, If I remember correctly, we use RT-Extension-RT2toRT3 several years ago. Kevin programmed it. http://www.cpan.org/authors/id/F/FA/FALCONE/RT-Extension-RT2toRT3-1.26.readme Cheers, Björn Bashir Jahed wrote: Hi All, I have a request from business to merge 2 RT systems. One is RT 3.x and the other is RT 2.x Is this possible, if yes could anyone advise on best route to take? Thanks bashir jahed nha | enhance 5 protea road | claremont | 7708 po box 24 | newlands | 7725 telephone +27 (21) 657-2574 mobile +27 (83) 414-0453 facsimile +27 (21) 657-2575 e-mail | messenger bashir.ja...@nha.co.za mailto:bashir.ja...@nha.co.za this message is subject to the disclaimer at www.nha.co.za/disclaimer.asp http://www.nha.co.za/disclaimer.asp or disclai...@nha.co.za mailto:disclai...@nha.co.za?subject=request%20disclaimer ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com 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: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] 10 Newest Unowned tickets i'm allowed to see
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Emmanuel Lacour elac...@easter-eggs.com wrote: Depending on your RT version, you can try the following option: Set($UseSQLForACLChecks, 1); but read comment on it in RT_Config.pm before enabling it. Go not to the docs for counsel, for they will say both no and yes. In some cases it result in performance improvements, but some setups can not handle it. Is this hardware- or memory-dependent? What are the variables in whether it improves or degrades...? At any rate, trying it now, as this sys isn't in production yet. Thanks for the pointer, i saw that option but i didn't understand what it meant at the time. -- /chown -R us:us /yourbase ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
Ham MI-ID, Torsten Brumm schrieb: Hi Andrea, i remember a threat like this some months ago and again: Yes, the book is still actual! There are many changes since 2005 but the core and most of the main features are working the same way. Torsten That said, maybe somebody finds the time to do a follow-up that O'Reilly can sell in the form of their PDF-only short-cuts for 10 USD. But I guess Bestpractical makes more money by hosting trainings than through the sales of the book... Rainer ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
That said, maybe somebody finds the time to do a follow-up that O'Reilly can sell in the form of their PDF-only short-cuts for 10 USD. But I guess Bestpractical makes more money by hosting trainings than through the sales of the book... That may be true, but has nothing to do with why I haven't been pressuring O'Reilly to do a new RT book. I'd love to see it happen - It's just not very high on the priority list...and I'd rather see a new book covering RT4 than RT 3.8. (http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/RT4) pgpymlEKYYroN.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
Jesse Vincent schrieb: That said, maybe somebody finds the time to do a follow-up that O'Reilly can sell in the form of their PDF-only short-cuts for 10 USD. But I guess Bestpractical makes more money by hosting trainings than through the sales of the book... That may be true, Well, it wasn't meant to sound negative. Just realistic ;-) but has nothing to do with why I haven't been pressuring O'Reilly to do a new RT book. Hm. I thought you wrote the book ;-) (With some others) I'd love to see it happen - It's just not very high on the priority list...and I'd rather see a new book covering RT4 than RT 3.8. (http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/RT4) Ah, interesting read. I wish you good progress ;-) But realistically, somebody would need to start writing that book now. Like all those Missing manual books that are released shortly after the software hits the street. Can you make an announcement, once you have a version that can be built and run to get an idea of what it looks like? I always want to make a VM-image of RT3.8 on FreeBSD with Postgres, but I never get around doing that, either... Best Regards, Rainer ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Book : does it worth?
Well, it wasn't meant to sound negative. Just realistic ;-) No worries. I just want to be clear that we're not intentionally holding back on docs to sell training :) I'd love to see it happen - It's just not very high on the priority list...and I'd rather see a new book covering RT4 than RT 3.8. (http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/RT4) Can you make an announcement, once you have a version that can be built and run to get an idea of what it looks like? The first alphas will really be look! It compiles! don't use it. We've started by gutting the internals and leaving the featureset alone. After 5+ years, it's something RT really needs. As we get toward beta, it will be more worth playing with. -j pgpeFrZhSKSDP.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] 10 Newest Unowned tickets i'm allowed to see
On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 10:59:13AM -0500, Rob Munsch wrote: On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Emmanuel Lacour elac...@easter-eggs.com wrote: Depending on your RT version, you can try the following option: Set($UseSQLForACLChecks, 1); but read comment on it in RT_Config.pm before enabling it. Go not to the docs for counsel, for they will say both no and yes. In some cases it result in performance improvements, but some setups can not handle it. Is this hardware- or memory-dependent? What are the variables in whether it improves or degrades...? At any rate, trying it now, as this sys isn't in production yet. Thanks for the pointer, i saw that option but i didn't understand what it meant at the time. I suspect that with certain backends or SearchBuilder versions, the DB plans could be umm... non-optimal for this feature. :) I am trying it here as well. Cheers, Ken ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] 10 Newest Unowned tickets i'm allowed to see
I suspect that with certain backends or SearchBuilder versions, the DB plans could be umm... non-optimal for this feature. :) I am trying it here as well. Indeed. It's still largely experimental. I'd always been fairly certain that it was impossible, but Ruslan worked a whole bunch of magic. Feedback would be hugely appreciated. pgpEBp0Ymi7b6.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] RT 3.8.2, Postfix, and external aliases
Hi all. I need a little guidance on a problem I'm having with RT 3.8.2 using Postfix as the MTA. The issue is that replies are not sent from RT when an external alias is used; these messages are identified as bounces because their 'Return-Path' header is empty. Replies are sent without incident when the actual address on the RT server is used. I do not have control over the remote server's configuration (running Microsoft Exchange). I do have control over my own Postfix server. The basic configuration is as follows: helpdesk-supp...@provider.com -- RT's queue address (for the Support queue) supp...@consumer.com -- Remote alias used for convenience The supp...@consumer.com address points to helpdesk-supp...@provider.com by way of a Distribution List which contains only one Contact, the target address. I'm told this is how one creates an alias on Exchange without having to create a new mailbox. When Postfix receives mail by way of the alias the headers look something like this: From MAILER-DAEMON Wed Feb 4 14:21:39 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: testinstance-supp...@provider.com [etc.] I do see the original destination address further down but that's expected since the message has to originate somewhere. When Postfix receives mail sent to the actual local address, the headers are more complete: From testacco...@gmail.com Thu Feb 5 09:36:41 2009 Return-Path: testacco...@gmail.com X-Original-To: helpdesk-supp...@provider.com I realize this may be a Postfix question but I'm just not sure where to start... My understanding is that the local delivery agent is responsible for setting the Return-Path and From headers but I assumed Postfix would do that if necessary. It is doing this for messages sent directly to addresses. The remote server is not setting these headers; I verified by sniffing the SMTP session. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thanks very much, Damon ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.8.2, Postfix, and external aliases
I don't know if postfix supports this, but Sendmail proper allows - ba which means that it populates the envelope sender from the From: line in the message. Adding this to the sendmailpipe invocation would solve your problem if postfix does this as well. On Feb 5, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Damon Miller wrote: Hi all. I need a little guidance on a problem I'm having with RT 3.8.2 using Postfix as the MTA. The issue is that replies are not sent from RT when an external alias is used; these messages are identified as bounces because their 'Return-Path' header is empty. Replies are sent without incident when the actual address on the RT server is used. I do not have control over the remote server's configuration (running Microsoft Exchange). I do have control over my own Postfix server. The basic configuration is as follows: helpdesk-supp...@provider.com -- RT's queue address (for the Support queue) supp...@consumer.com -- Remote alias used for convenience The supp...@consumer.com address points to helpdesk-supp...@provider.com by way of a Distribution List which contains only one Contact, the target address. I'm told this is how one creates an alias on Exchange without having to create a new mailbox. When Postfix receives mail by way of the alias the headers look something like this: From MAILER-DAEMON Wed Feb 4 14:21:39 2009 Return-Path: X-Original-To: testinstance-supp...@provider.com [etc.] I do see the original destination address further down but that's expected since the message has to originate somewhere. When Postfix receives mail sent to the actual local address, the headers are more complete: From testacco...@gmail.com Thu Feb 5 09:36:41 2009 Return-Path: testacco...@gmail.com X-Original-To: helpdesk-supp...@provider.com I realize this may be a Postfix question but I'm just not sure where to start... My understanding is that the local delivery agent is responsible for setting the Return-Path and From headers but I assumed Postfix would do that if necessary. It is doing this for messages sent directly to addresses. The remote server is not setting these headers; I verified by sniffing the SMTP session. Any suggestions would be most appreciated. Thanks very much, Damon ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com -- Jo Rhett Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source and other randomness ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] Quick hack to add Resolved column to Quicksearch
I had a request from one of my users to add a link to view all
resolved tickets to he Quicksearch block in the rt-at-a-glance.
Thought someone might find this useful.
Make the following change to /opt/rt3/share/html/Elements (add line
65). You can add any other status by changing that line. It ONLY
affects the quicksearch.
62foreach ( RT::Queue-ActiveStatusArray ) {
63push @conditions, { cond = Status = '$_', name = loc($_) };
64}
65 + push @conditions, { cond = Status = 'resolved', name='resolved'};
~Sam
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.8.2, Postfix, and external aliases
Jo,
Thanks very much for your reply. I don't think Postfix's command-line
'sendmail' supports this option, unfortunately... Postfix's
documentation states that the local delivery agent ('local') does
prepend Return-Path and From headers but this isn't happening for me.
I'll send a note to the Postfix list. Hopefully someone will provide
some guidance.
Thanks again,
Damon
--
Damon T. Miller
Director of Application Services
Thinking Phone Networks
da...@thinkingphones.com
617-649-1388 (Office)
-Original Message-
From: Jo Rhett [mailto:jrh...@netconsonance.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2009 2:56 PM
To: Damon Miller
Cc: rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com
Subject: Re: [rt-users] RT 3.8.2, Postfix, and external aliases
I don't know if postfix supports this, but Sendmail proper allows -
ba which means that it populates the envelope sender from the From:
line in the message. Adding this to the sendmailpipe invocation would
solve your problem if postfix does this as well.
On Feb 5, 2009, at 11:23 AM, Damon Miller wrote:
Hi all. I need a little guidance on a problem I'm having with RT
3.8.2
using Postfix as the MTA.
The issue is that replies are not sent from RT when an external
alias is
used; these messages are identified as bounces because their
'Return-Path' header is empty. Replies are sent without incident
when
the actual address on the RT server is used.
I do not have control over the remote server's configuration
(running
Microsoft Exchange). I do have control over my own Postfix server.
The basic configuration is as follows:
helpdesk-supp...@provider.com -- RT's queue address (for the
Support
queue)
supp...@consumer.com -- Remote alias used for convenience
The supp...@consumer.com address points to
helpdesk-supp...@provider.com
by way of a Distribution List which contains only one Contact,
the
target address. I'm told this is how one creates an alias on
Exchange
without having to create a new mailbox.
When Postfix receives mail by way of the alias the headers look
something like this:
From MAILER-DAEMON Wed Feb 4 14:21:39 2009
Return-Path:
X-Original-To: testinstance-supp...@provider.com
[etc.]
I do see the original destination address further down but that's
expected since the message has to originate somewhere.
When Postfix receives mail sent to the actual local address, the
headers
are more complete:
From testacco...@gmail.com Thu Feb 5 09:36:41 2009
Return-Path: testacco...@gmail.com
X-Original-To: helpdesk-supp...@provider.com
I realize this may be a Postfix question but I'm just not sure where
to
start... My understanding is that the local delivery agent is
responsible for setting the Return-Path and From headers but I
assumed Postfix would do that if necessary. It is doing this for
messages sent directly to addresses. The remote server is not
setting
these headers; I verified by sniffing the SMTP session.
Any suggestions would be most appreciated.
Thanks very much,
Damon
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
--
Jo Rhett
Net Consonance : consonant endings by net philanthropy, open source
and other randomness
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] RT Time fields in days?
Kristian,
Thanks. I'll give it a try.
Kenn
LBNL
On 2/4/2009 2:46 AM, Kristian Davies wrote:
Not my code, but in the interest of sharing:
local/html/Elements/SelectTimeUnits
%# END BPS TAGGED BLOCK }}}
% my $selected = 'minutes';
% $selected = 'hours' if $minutes 60;
% $selected = 'days' if $minutes 480;
select class=TimeUnits id=% $Name % name=% $Name %
option value=minutes % (($selected eq
'minutes')?'selected=selected':'') %% loc('Minutes') %/option
option value=hours % (($selected eq
'hours')?'selected=selected':'') %% loc('Hours') %/option
option value=days % (($selected eq
'days')?'selected=selected':'') %% loc('Days') %/option
/select
%INIT
$Name .= '-TimeUnits' unless $Name =~ /-TimeUnits$/io;
/%INIT
%ARGS
$Name = ''
$minutes = ''
/%ARGS
Kristian
___
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com
Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Security risk! Passwords can be compromised!
On Tue 3.Feb'09 at 22:37:59 -0500, Isaac Vetter wrote: The docs for 'LogStackTrace' have been updated as follows. How do folks feel about the new notice? If set then logging will include stack traces for messages with level equal or greater than specified. NOTICE: Stack traces include parameters that functions or methods were called with. It is possible for stack trace logging to reveal sensitive information such as passwords and ticket content in your logs. Jesse, Since you're asking (and towards the goal of something useful coming from this thread). :) I would say that, in this case, you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition. How about: Stack traces include the parameters of called functions. or Stack traces include the parameters used within methods and functions. or ... I've just checked in this: NOTICE: Stack traces include parameters supplied to functions or methods. It is possible for stack trace logging to reveal sensitive information such as passwords or ticket content in your logs. pgpmijWY9UzUx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Scrip send email on create
Dan, I may be wrong, but I believe you can order the sequence of scrips by the name field. I put a 1a, 1b, 2a, 2c in front of the name of several scrips I have that run for the same transaction, but need them to run in sequence. That and setting the TransactionBatch to 1 works for me. Hope this helps. Hope this helps. Kenn LBNL On 2/4/2009 10:34 AM, Dan O'Neill wrote: Jeremy Burke wrote: I think you need 2 scrips. The scrip you have below and then another scrip to send e-mail on create to the AdminCCs. You need to make sure the Add AdminCC scrip you have below is executed before the scrip that sends to the AdminCCs. I'm using RT 3.8.1 and this is how I have it setup to work. The 1 at the beginning of Scrip #2's description forces this scrip to be run before scrip #1 Jeremy, Thanks for the information. This helps, but doesn't solve the problem because I'm using RT 3.4.5 which does not guarantee scrip order. Thus, an upgrade is likely to be the path I have to take. I really don't want to upgrade right now. This wiki article http://wiki.bestpractical.com/view/TransactionBatchStage covers my problem well. Does anyone have a solution for rt 3.4.5? Dan ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com 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: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] FW: Quick Ticket Creation widget - how to remove it?
Jim, I'mnot sure, but I think you have to remove that particular entry from the ATTRIBUTES Table for each user that has selected the feature on their home page (3.6+). Also, you need to remove it from the RT_SiteConfig.pm file. I removed it from mine - Set($HomepageComponents, [qw(Quicksearch MySupportQueues MyReminders RefreshHomepage)]);. Hope this helps. Kenn LBNL On 2/4/2009 6:53 AM, Jim Tambling wrote: That only removes it from the layout of the user that's logged in. I want to remove it from everyone's layout. Jim -Original Message- From: Jeff Voskamp [mailto:javos...@uwaterloo.ca] Sent: 04 February 2009 14:49 To: Jim Tambling Subject: Re: [rt-users] Quick Ticket Creation widget - how to remove it? Jim Tambling wrote: As per the subject, fairly new to RT but I have looked everywhere and can't find a simple way to do it. Regards Configuration-Global-RT at a Glance and pull it from the layout. Jeff ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com 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: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] Security risk! Passwords can be compromised!
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Jesse Vincent je...@bestpractical.com wrote: On Tue 3.Feb'09 at 22:37:59 -0500, Isaac Vetter wrote: The docs for 'LogStackTrace' have been updated as follows. How do folks feel about the new notice? If set then logging will include stack traces for messages with level equal or greater than specified. NOTICE: Stack traces include parameters that functions or methods were called with. It is possible for stack trace logging to reveal sensitive information such as passwords and ticket content in your logs. Jesse, Since you're asking (and towards the goal of something useful coming from this thread). :) I would say that, in this case, you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition. How about: Stack traces include the parameters of called functions. or Stack traces include the parameters used within methods and functions. or ... I've just checked in this: NOTICE: Stack traces include parameters supplied to functions or methods. It is possible for stack trace logging to reveal sensitive information such as passwords or ticket content in your logs. That sounds perfect. Once i was done testing ExternalAuth, i turned off stack traces then manually blew away those sections of the logs that contained the passwords anyway, just to keep in paranoia practice. -- /chown -R us:us /yourbase ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] FW: Quick Ticket Creation widget - how to remove it?
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Kenneth Crocker kfcroc...@lbl.gov wrote: Jim, I'mnot sure, but I think you have to remove that particular entry from the ATTRIBUTES Table for each user that has selected the feature on their home page (3.6+). Also, you need to remove it from the RT_SiteConfig.pm file. I removed it from mine - Set($HomepageComponents, [qw(Quicksearch MySupportQueues MyReminders RefreshHomepage)]);. Hope this helps. Kenn LBNL On 2/4/2009 6:53 AM, Jim Tambling wrote: That only removes it from the layout of the user that's logged in. I want to remove it from everyone's layout. Jim -Original Message- From: Jeff Voskamp [mailto:javos...@uwaterloo.ca] Sent: 04 February 2009 14:49 To: Jim Tambling Subject: Re: [rt-users] Quick Ticket Creation widget - how to remove it? Jim Tambling wrote: As per the subject, fairly new to RT but I have looked everywhere and can't find a simple way to do it. Regards Configuration-Global-RT at a Glance and pull it from the layout. Jeff When logged in as root, Global - RT at a glance - which describes itself as altering the default view - lets me remove QuickCreate. Logging out as root and back in as a normal (privileged, in a group) user no longer has the QuickCreate widget in my At A Glance, indicating that it does indeed modify the default view for all users. The user as far as i can tell does not have permissions to add it back. This is in 3.8.2, if that matters. -- /chown -R us:us /yourbase ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
[rt-users] FW: 3.8.1 - New upgrade slow on 'New Search click
I sent this through a while ago, but got no responses. Anybody know what can help with this slow 'Search page' coming up issue? I've since seen a few other people mention the issue, but no response there either.. Anybody? Stuart -Original Message- From: Stuart Browne Sent: Thursday, 4 December 2008 12:06 To: 'rt-users@lists.bestpractical.com' Subject: 3.8.1 - New upgrade slow on 'New Search click Hi, After doing a 3.8.1 upgrade (install into new directory, upgrade db from 3.6.5), clicking on 'Tickets' / 'New Search' causes a 10-15 second pause. Digging through the active queries when that occurs shows the following query: SELECT DISTINCT main.* FROM Users main CROSS JOIN ACL ACL_4 JOIN Principals Principals_1 ON ( Principals_1.id = main.id ) JOIN CachedGroupMembers CachedGroupMembers_2 ON ( CachedGroupMembers_2.MemberId = Principals_1.id ) JOIN Groups Groups_3 ON ( Groups_3.id = CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId ) WHERE (Principals_1.Disabled = '0') AND (ACL_4.PrincipalType = Groups_3.Type) AND (Principals_1.id != '1') AND (Principals_1.PrincipalType = 'User') AND (ACL_4.RightName = 'OwnTicket' OR ACL_4.RightName = 'SuperUser') AND (Groups_3.Domain = 'RT::Queue-Role') AND ((ACL_4.ObjectType = 'RT::Queue') OR (ACL_4.ObjectType = 'RT::System')) ORDER BY main.Name ASC Eww. Anyway. The explain on this shows: *** 1. row *** id: 1 select_type: SIMPLE table: main type: range possible_keys: PRIMARY key: PRIMARY key_len: 4 ref: NULL rows: 65 Extra: Using where; Using temporary; Using filesort *** 2. row *** id: 1 select_type: SIMPLE table: Principals_1 type: eq_ref possible_keys: PRIMARY key: PRIMARY key_len: 4 ref: rt3.main.id rows: 1 Extra: Using where; Distinct *** 3. row *** id: 1 select_type: SIMPLE table: CachedGroupMembers_2 type: ref possible_keys: DisGrouMem,CachedGroupMembers3 key: CachedGroupMembers3 key_len: 5 ref: rt3.Principals_1.id rows: 1 Extra: Using where; Distinct *** 4. row *** id: 1 select_type: SIMPLE table: ACL_4 type: range possible_keys: ACL1 key: ACL1 key_len: 54 ref: NULL rows: 82 Extra: Using where; Using index; Distinct *** 5. row *** id: 1 select_type: SIMPLE table: Groups_3 type: eq_ref possible_keys: PRIMARY,Groups1,Groups2 key: PRIMARY key_len: 4 ref: rt3.CachedGroupMembers_2.GroupId rows: 1 Extra: Using where; Distinct Using google, two possible matches were found. - One of the queues has a 'Group Right' allowing 'Everyone' to 'Own Ticket'. I have gone through all our queues, found one queue with this permission. Removed the permission, issue still persists. I've even gone through and verified disabled queue's group rights. - The explain shows 'Using filesort' and the 'tmp_table_size' should be increased. Changing this to 4 times the default has had no effect. This coupled with the fact that our DB isn't that big. So, I was wondering if anybody else was experiencing this pause, and preferably if anybody knows what's causing it so I can fix it. Thanks Stuart J. Browne ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
Re: [rt-users] 10 Newest Unowned tickets i'm allowed to see
DB and setup dependent. ACL checks in RT are painful for all DBs, however these days we at least know how to cook old queries and there are a lot of knowledge on the web. This new feature changes balance. New queries may need new indexes, new execution paths may need new optimizations and bug fixes and... On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 6:59 PM, Rob Munsch rob.mun...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 8:15 AM, Emmanuel Lacour elac...@easter-eggs.com wrote: Depending on your RT version, you can try the following option: Set($UseSQLForACLChecks, 1); but read comment on it in RT_Config.pm before enabling it. Go not to the docs for counsel, for they will say both no and yes. In some cases it result in performance improvements, but some setups can not handle it. Is this hardware- or memory-dependent? What are the variables in whether it improves or degrades...? At any rate, trying it now, as this sys isn't in production yet. Thanks for the pointer, i saw that option but i didn't understand what it meant at the time. -- /chown -R us:us /yourbase ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com -- Best regards, Ruslan. ___ http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users Community help: http://wiki.bestpractical.com Commercial support: sa...@bestpractical.com Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media. Buy a copy at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
