samwoo

+1

I am so sorry for hijacking this thread but how did u get dark mode in Hornbill @Dan MunnsMunns? Could you detail that in a post? But to be on topic for @Sophie Springett, it is always important to use the l "contains" operator (as Dan advised) instead of "equal to" because if you have a list box, when the list is submitted into the system with multiple values selected, the output are saved into a single field, separated by commas. For example "ICE, eCare, eCare Navigation" Basically with "equal to" the override flag will look something like this "ICE, eCare, eCare Navigation" - equal to - "ICE" That query doesn't make sense. This however does.. " ICE, eCare, eCare Navigation" - contains - "ICE" I hope that makes sense (hard to see and type on my phone but I tried) Thanks, Samuel

Hi @Steve G Good presentation and good to meet you yesterday with @Aaron Summers. Really appreciate you demonstrating this as we can visualise it and take other ideas forward. I wonder if there could be a searchable repository for sharing and viewing this kind of content? Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @Victor i will have a look.

+1 - this isn't possible at the moment as far as I am aware.

Hi, I would like to request the ability only produce reports on a scheduled basis only if there are data Returned in the query in Service Manager reporting. This will prevent users from unnecessarily going into report if there are no data. Most of the reports will be saved into document manager. Use cases -identifying duplicate email addresses Identifying priority tickets in the last 24 hours with latest information etc. (management purposes) Identifying tickets with BPM issues Many more These would only be produced if there were data. Thanks, Samuel

Hello, When a user responds to an email sent within that ticket, that ticket gets updated with the email from the user. However... we have 1 user where this process isn't working at all. I've had a look at the EspMailService log and i can see the following: AutoResponder request failed to process, forwarding to [Inbox] mailbox folder. Operation[apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/arOperation:updateRequest] FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/flowcode/fc_ar/updateRequest): nodeName: Exception; nodeId: 80ce050f-0394-4533-ac80-2d85c69be317; At 322/1: "Uncaught FCSException: ERROR(012)" throw(e); _fc_node_exec_80ce050f_0394_4533_ac80_2d85c69be317 I have checked the following things are ok: - User has valid Email Address - check - User Type is set to Basic - check - User has Basic User Role and Self Service User - check - Email contains the correct Request Ref - check - The same routing rule works for other tickets - check There doesn't appear to be anything indifferent with this user responding to those emails,... but every time her she does respond, her email never gets applied to the ticket... but for everyone else it does. Can someone advise? Thanks, Samuel

+1

Following this with interest in case there appears to be a better way to manage archived users discussed on here. Currently all archived users in AD on our side are moved to an Archived OU as part of the leavers process, with an x in front of their email addresses. We populate the description field with the month they were archived and manually delete them after a few months by checking that description field regularly.

Hi @James Ainsworth, Most of our Services are supported by all teams, yes we want the concept of teams not related to the Service Desk for Basic users and not have them listed when assigning tickets. This could potentially lead to Services where certain teams could be subscribed to in the future. Thanks, Samuel

Hello, I am wondering if we can create "Teams" in Organisations, but hide it from the "Assign" list against tickets? This is for the "Basic" users only and helps to preserve the Customer information present on the Customer Details region against tickets. This will also allow us to force select only from a list of teams and department values when doing an external script/process for the New Starter / Mover Processes in Active Directory. Please advise. Thanks, Samuel

I've had this before +1+

+1

Hi @James Ainsworth, Thanks for responding... please forgive me as I wasn't clear in my email what I was looking for. I wanted to break up / group the custom and fixed fields in the request details using the Edit Request Details form, and being able to slot in the things I mentioned in my first post. See this terrible example I drew up: 1. The line breaks slotted in where required (the colour would match the Hornbill pallette) 2. Labels added in where required 3. Table added in (the lines may or may not be visible, but the colour would match the Hornbill pallette) Unfortunately using Custom Fields for this isn't feasible as we may need to use them to capture details from the PCF for example. So this is a request to have additional formatting controls in the Edit Request Details region. Thanks, Samuel

Hello, I am requesting the ability to be able to add in Dividers, Tables, Columns and Labels in the "Request Details" region I do not know if all, some or none of this is possible but here goes Dividers - The ability to have a horizontal line to break up the Request Details region where required Tables - The ability to define a region which can be divided into columns and rows and the ability to have a header. This so we can specify a custom layout and allow grouping of fields/values against a request Columns - The ability to split the Request Details into 2 columns and have the fields on the left, and the value on the right Labels - In addition to the dividers will allow us to break up and group fields together. Thanks, Samuel