Re: OT: Open Minds in IT IN CA: was (Re: [rt-users] RT 4)
Original Message Subject: Re: OT: Open Minds in IT IN CA: was (Re: [rt-users] RT 4) Date: Fri, 18 May 2007 21:06:12 -0700 From: Andrew Redman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Robert G. Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Just as a comment, the Boss loved it when I got RT working, and his Boss loved it when we started to get stats on performance improvements from it, so that was all groovy. That said, there is one person in our department (the oldest and arguably least competent, though there is quite a lively competition for that title...) has the idea that "If I pay more for it, it must be better" firmly embedded in his head. We were looking at 3 backup systems, one cost $5k and did everything we wanted and more, the other was $30k, and fell short of a few of our requirements, and he insisted that the $30k one was the way to go. I suppose if you had a couple people like that in key positions in a company then OSS could have some difficulty... Anyway, I'm just glad he's not my boss. Keep up the RT awesomeness. - Andrew Robert G. Werner wrote: > Baytalskiy, Sal wrote: >> I wish you were right... > [snip] > It certainly hasn't been my experience. My bosses really like it when > I make something happen and it doesn't cost them much of anything but > my time. > > Certainly, my bosses aren't open source zealots. We are an Oracle > shop. But ever place I've worked, when I bring in important > improvements in network reliability and monitoring or now trouble > ticket tracking with RT the response has been ecstatic and the fact > that it doesn't cost anything has been huge. > > The added luxury of being able to modify and look at the code has been > icing on the cake. > > My experiences have mostly been in relatively small shops (50 - 300 > people) over the last 10 years in California so take what I say with > an enormous grain of salt. > > But really, to me, it sounds like there are better jobs out there > for you. > ___ 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
Re: [rt-users] Reminders in 3.6?
Mike - The query that finds reminders is located near the end of rt3/share/html/Elements/MyReminders. You can copy that to rt3/local/html/Elements and modify it, and I assume that with a little bit of creative query writing you could get what you want. Hope that helps, - Andrew Redman Mike Dent wrote: Hi, I've just upgraded to 3.6.3 from 3.4.1. I notice the new reminders feature. How is this supposed to work or be used? I tried setting a reminder for 6 months to remind me to call a customer. This then appears on the "RT at a glance" page. I assume if I add 20 more reminders for several months down the line then each of these will appear on this screen. Is it possible to have them appear on the front screen only a day, or a predefined time before the reminder date? Thanks Mike ___ 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
[Fwd: Re: [rt-users] Re: RT 3.6.3 Mandatory CF's]
This is what I have been doing, and it worked in 3.6.1. Since I upgraded to 3.6.3, the ()? causes no regexp matching to be done (it lets strings pass '(/d)?'.) I can get mandatory fields to work, just not optional fields with enforced formatting. - Andrew Redman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Schultz, Eric wrote: just a simple question for Custom Fields: Can a Custom Field be 'validate', and non-mandatory? This means, only a check that the content is a Number and nothing else but not needed or mandatory? Actually, we are just in the process at where I work of modifying RT to make "Mandatory" a completely separate checkbox to format validation partly for this very reason. We want all this in the core API so it's enforced for all interfaces (GUI, REST, Email ...) and so "being mandatory" is completely separate from "matching a certain pattern". There are a few reasons why this makes sense and it's really important when using RT in an audited change management environment. We'll probably be posting the patches when it's done (fairly soon). PK I thought that using the current interface, if you wanted to make something non-mandatory, you could just wrap a '()?' around it (not including quotes)? I'm pretty sure I've seen that posted to the mailing list as well. Eric Schultz United Online ___ 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
Re: [rt-users] RT 3.6.3: Cannot chnage owner to another user.
That diff isn't quite what I got with RT 3.6.3 - Mine looks more like this:
--- /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Ticket_Overlay.pm 2006-12-01 11:00:23.0 -0800
+++ /opt/rt3/local/lib/RT/Ticket_Overlay.pm 2007-02-02
09:07:05.0 -0800
@@ -3016,7 +3016,8 @@
# the current user
if ( $Type ne 'Steal' and $Type ne 'Force'
and $OldOwnerObj->Id != $RT::Nobody->Id
- and $OldOwnerObj->Id != $self->CurrentUser->Id )
+ and $OldOwnerObj->Id != $self->CurrentUser->Id
+ and !$self->CurrentUserHasRight('SuperUser'))
{
return ( 0, $self->loc("You can only take tickets that are unowned") )
if $NewOwnerObj->id == $self->CurrentUser->id;
Judging from the date on your diff, you may have not updated your local
copy of Ticket_Overlay.pm when you updated RT. Either way, thanks for
the good idea.
Cheers,
Andrew Redman
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Help Desk Consultant
Gevirtz Graduate School of Education
University of California Santa Barbara
--
Peer Michael wrote:
With this diff, superusers can reassign tickets. It works for us.
--- /opt/rt3/lib/RT/Ticket_Overlay.pm 2005-11-14 21:43:24.0 +0100
+++ /opt/rt3/local/lib/RT/Ticket_Overlay.pm 2007-01-30
17:39:31.0 +0100
@@ -2959,6 +2959,7 @@
and #If we're not stealing
( $self->OwnerObj->Id != $RT::Nobody->Id ) and #and the owner is set
( $self->CurrentUser->Id ne $self->OwnerObj->Id() )
+ and (!$self->CurrentUserHasRight('SuperUser')) #and is not superuser
) { #and it's not us
return ( 0,
$self->loc(
Michael Peer
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Nick
Metrowsky
*Sent:* Thursday, 01 February, 2007 23:25
*To:* RT Users
*Subject:* [rt-users] RT 3.6.3: Cannot chnage owner to another user.
Hi Everyone,
I have Super User and I cannot change the ownership of a ticket from
one person to another. I get an error “You can only take tickets that
are unowned” or “You can only reassign tickets that you own or that
are unowned”. This is definitely a different behavior than that of RT
3.4.4.
Any ideas on this one?
Nick
*-*
*Nick Metrowsky***
*Consulting System Administrator***
*303-684-4785 Office***
*303-684-4100 Fax***
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>***
*DigitalGlobe ®, An Imaging and Information Company*
*http://www.digitalglobe.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
begin:vcard
fn:Andrew Redman
n:Redman;Andrew
version:2.1
end:vcard
___
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
Re: [rt-users] Long history text widens pages
Hi -
We ran into this problem as well (with 3.6.1), and our solution (so far
as I understand it... I'm not really a CSS guy) was to make pre tags
scroll. It results in a scroll bar at the bottom of whatever segment
would have caused the page to over widen. We added this to the rt css:
pre
{
padding:2px;
overflow:auto;
}
I know it works in Opera and Firefox, and I think the guy that actually
wrote that bit tested it for all the browsers he could access easily,
but I can't guarantee that. In any case its better than mutilating words
to wrap.
- Andrew Redman
ITG Help Desk
Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, UCSB
Stephen Turner wrote:
Hello,
This must have come up before, but I can't find anything anywhere in
archives or on the wiki...
A long unbroken string of text (often a URL) in a history entry pushes the
page way out to the right so that you have to scroll to the right to find
Submit buttons etc. I've tried various fixes but found nothing that will
work in all the browser/OS combinations we support.
Has anyone else dealt with this problem and come up with an elegant
solution?
Thanks,
Steve
Stephen Turner
Senior Programmer/Analyst - Client Support Services
MIT Information Services and Technology (IS&T)
___
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
