Victor

This is the pin I was referring to:

@JonathanD it's stored in the details section. Click on the Details bar and it should expand. You also have a pin you can enable to have the detail section expanded by default...

@JonathanD when autoresponder raises a request, the email subject is put as incident summary and email body as incident details... This is not working for you? (I had a look in the logs, I can't see any request where this failed)... Btw, the logs screenshot you posted are not relevant for this, the autoresponder actions are recorded into server service logs...

@SJEaton it could be because you have enabled mandatory comments on request canceling. The BP does not have the "comment" option when canceling. Try and disable this setting and give it another try to see if the BP does the cancelling...

@JonathanD as @DeadMeatGF suggested, you would need a different operator (the LIKE operator) if you want to match a specified pattern in a string (text). Using equal (=) in the rule expression means that you instruct the routing rule to "hard" match, in other words match the field with the whole value, rather than searching for that value in the field you specified (body, subject, etc...). Alos make sure the syntax is correct, for example "bodysubject" is an invalid field, it needs to be either "body" or "subject"...

@Martyn Houghton Not that I am aware of, not yet anyway, but this is why the dev diary initiative ... All these aspects can be discussed and see how a certain feature/functionality would best fit our customer needs

@samwoo Access and visibility of request is determined by two factors: teams supporting the service on the request; subscribers to the service on the request. Static filters/views (such as All My Teams and All My Services) work like this: All My Teams will display all tickets where the analyst is member of the ticket owner team - service subscription is ignored. All My Services will display all tickets where the service on the ticket is supported by the analyst team(s). Custom filters/views work like this (when having or not having team or service condition): if the custom view has a team and a service condition both are evaluated when displaying the results; if the custom view has a team condition but no service condition then displayed results will contain requests where the analyst is member of the ticket owner team specified in the condition and where the service on the ticket is supported by the analyst team(s); if the custom view has a service condition but no team condition then displayed results will contain requests where the service on the ticket is supported by the analyst team(s) and where the analyst is member of the ticket owner team. Think of custom filters/views, in regards to team and service filtering, as a combination of All My Teams and All My Services.So, your custom view, which has a team condition will filter out tickets based on service subscription as well, whereby All My Teams ignore the service subscription criteria...which means different results. I haven't looked at the results returned in your instance by following the above logic maybe you can have a look if this is why you/your analyst see different results?

@Sonali currently you can't have any BP progress criteria in view definition I'm afraid... You can only filter requests based on the criteria presented in the condition drop down list...

@m.vandun You have multiple contacts with the same email address then... when authentication takes place Hornbill looks at the first record that matches a log on id or email address... because this returns mores than one result it matched another record than the one intended... I'll have a look and send you these details in a PM

Nice !!! Can't wait to use this

@SJEaton yes, there are: You need to choose what type of notifications you want for your analysts: hornbill, email or both; If you enable email notifications you will also need to ensure the notification mailbox and relevant templates are also set.

@lee mcdermott refreshing the browser might not be enough... best to try is to close it completely and open it again...

@lee mcdermott it does not recognise their sessions... as @nasimg suggested, can you ask them to try and close the browser window(s) then generate the password reset link again, then try and reset...

@lee mcdermott not currently possible I'm afraid... all views (tasks and requests for example) have the columns width dynamically generated by the UI...

@samwoo there are some improvements being made in this area, which will cover what you try to achieve..I think... @Ehsan was working on this, he might be able to give some more insight into this...

@derekgreen good to hear ...any they end up in supernovae

@SJEaton you beat me to it ... But to be honest I actually had no idea you can finish on another parallel process end! So I learn something new today...

@derekgreen the rest of the affected request should now be fixed... These are the ones I found (15 of them enclosed below) which referred to the "old" service level ID. I hope these are the whole lot but if you find any that I might have missed please let me know IN00000969, IN00000978, IN00001162, IN00001187, IN00001202, IN00001226, IN00001257, IN00001266, IN00001270, IN00001271, IN00001281, IN00001284, IN00001290, IN00001299, IN00001303

@Rohit Govind I know !!! They should know better!!! ... I think on this occasion the requests are not at fault...nor the BP configuration... I ran some tests and I suspect the "Close after a period of time" action is not triggering the closure after 1 min (as configured)... I asked dev team if they have any thoughts as I suspect a defect at this point...

@SJEaton it does explain thanks, let me have a think ...

@derekgreen I threatened the instance that I know where it is hosted...what services it uses an so forth... fear works! I'll have a look and see (which/how) the rest of the affected request and apply the fix (if is the same issue, but it looks like it...)

@derekgreen right, I just had a word with your instance, the behavior is unacceptable! ... May I ask to give it another go... third time's the charm they say!

@derekgreen hmm... think I have missed something before... argh, you make me work...so much for my plan to slack all day ... can you try again?

@Rohit Govind thanks, I'll have a look and see if I can spot anything obvious why they failed to do as told!

@SJEaton hmm... interesting scenario you have there, I actually never thought of it before ... Your assumption is correct, you can't end the BP inside parallel processing... you don't necessarily have to have the decision node outside, but the end needs to be outside... What is the process trying to do, how you want it to work? Perhaps we can think of a way to achieve the desired workflow with the end node outside...