samwoo

Just to clarify, I am talking about adding those extra fields to this screen: We have an area that is used to capture Versions, so why not make use of it and expand on it. Please note that we do not create new Assets for each new version, this would be a complete waste of time to rebuilding linked assets against Assets, Workflows, Services etc. The only time we would do that, is if we have multiple Asset versions on the estate for any reason, and as far as I know, there is only a small handful of non-business-critical apps.

Good afternoon, In order for us to correctly manage the versions of our Software, I would like to request an enhancement to the Vendor Product Versions. I would like to request the following additional fields to be associated with the Vendor Product Versions: Support Start Date Support End Date Extended Support Date Support Status These fields should be optional, but for our Business-Critical Applications, this would be a great asset to Asset Management where we can identify software/business applications that are due to go out of support. These should be included as fields within the Software Details region within Software Assets, and when updated in there, it also updates the Vendor Product Versions table. The Support Status should be a process that runs daily behind the scenes that checks the Support End Date and Extended Support Date for all the Vendor Product Versions and update accordingly. The statuses I believe should be: In Support In Extended Support Only if the Support End Date has passed And there is an Extended Support Date supplied Coming Out of Support Maybe there should be a parameter to control the period in months? Coming out of Extended Support Only if the Support End Date has passed And there is an Extended Support Date supplied And maybe there should be a parameter to control the period in months?) Out of Support For Versions where no date is specified, Asset users can manually set the status accordingly. This will be a great help in reporting and dashboards. We are looking to move from our Spreadsheet driven Applications roadmap to using Hornbill, and what we have so far is great (a combination of Assets, Asset Shared Users, Asset Vendors, Products and Versions, Config Manager Item Dependencies, Suppliers and Reporting). Thanks, Samuel

Good afternoon, Just bumping up to see if this has been looked at by any chance?

Any updates on this one?

Hi @AlexTumber, Sorry for naming you directly, I was wondering if this could be considered in a future Service Manager enhancement, particularly around the Service Portfolio improvements? Thanks, Samuel

I've had to make use of the Software class for this, but I still think an Asset Class for Certificates should be considered? Either that or provide additional fields for the Software class that simply has "Start Date", "End Date", "Expiry Date". The Software Asset already contains Licence Start Date, Licence End Date and Licence Expiry Date but I don't want to translate these as this is being used for other Software Asset Types.

Hi @AlexTumber, I was wondering if this ever made it any further in the discussions? By the way, great stuff on the HUG yesterday

Good afternoon, Just bumping up to see if this has been looked at by any chance?

Good afternoon, I need a way to display the Team that is the main contact for an Asset, so we can identify who is responsible if anything needs to be for it. However, I could not see any way of adding a Supporting Team directly, so instead made the Asset a "Shared" Asset (even though it isn't) and I added a Hornbill Team to it. But then I realised that I could not set the Team's relationship to the Asset, so I went into the CM Diagram to see if I can add a relationship to it it (ie. Main Contact) but the Team is not being displayed in the Diagram at all. This is the value set against the app.cm.explorer.diagram.expand setting: { "Asset": true, "Colleagues": true, "Contact": true, "Attachment": false, "Requests": true, "Services": true, "default": false } (Initially Colleagues and Contact were set to false, so I set them to true, but I still cannot see the Team). I can't help but think that maybe there is a missing object that relates to Organisations/Groups in the JSON? If I cannot do it the way I thought I could, please can someone advise any other ways this could be achieved? Otherwise, I think a new field for the standard assets table (for all classes) is required, to store the Supporting Team, with the ability to select from the Orgs set up in Hornbill. Thanks, Samuel

thanks @Steve Giller - really keen on this being a reality in Hornbill, so fingers crossed.

+1 Currently need configure multiple nodes to add each relevant role to apply to users via the BPM. Would be good to use templates that has a collection of roles instead (then allows for updating the template outside of the BPM once and the changes will be reflect in future requests).

Thanks @Gerry, I appreciate the response

Hi @Gerry, You may have already seen in the Thread, that I have requested for some new supported API's. I do, however, have another question. With any supported API's, even ones that are requested and implemented, are there potential for these to be added in the future to be used in Workflows as a Hornbill Automation node as well? For example, for the API's I have requested (related to Shared Users against Assets), I don't think there is any equivalent Hornbill Automations for these, but I think it would certainly be useful to include in the Workflow so we can utilize Hornbill more. As of current, I know it's risky, but I do use the HTTP iBridge to run some of these, but it would be good if there could be a way to run Automations for single assets by passing an Asset ID into them, instead of using the nodes that applies to all assets (or by type) that are linked to the Request. Thanks, Samuel

Use case: We run external PowerShell scripts that goes through the databases for multiple Applications on the estate. We run automatically these to check if the users still exist in Active Directory, as well as doing other checks for example if there is no email address etc. The outputs of these checks are a HTML file that gets logged into Hornbill via the Email Routing rules and assigned to the relevant team for that Application. If a User does not exist in Active Directory and are inactive in the Application but is still a "Shared" user against the Asset in Hornbill, then the process also removes the User to the Asset in Hornbill. This is also done via the Business Process as well during our Movers and Leaver processes. Currently, there are no supported API's related to Shared Users against Assets, we are currently using the old API's for these processes.

Use case: We run external PowerShell scripts that goes through the databases for multiple Applications on the estate. We run automatically these to check if the users still exist in Active Directory, as well as doing other checks for example if there is no email address etc. The outputs of these checks are a HTML file that gets logged into Hornbill via the Email Routing rules and assigned to the relevant team for that Application. If a User exists in Active Directory, and that they have been using these Applications, then the process also adds the User to the Asset in Hornbill. This is useful for our Movers and Leaver processes. Currently, there are no supported API's related to Shared Users against Assets, we are currently using the old API's for these processes.

Good afternoon, I would like to request for a supported API that will unlink ALL "Shared Users" to a given "Asset ID". Application: Service Manager Entity: Assets Name: assetSharedUsersRemoveAll Request Parameters: assetId <string/number> <required> Response Parameters: userRemovedCount <string/number> exceptionName <string> exceptionSummary <string> Thanks, Samuel Wood

Good afternoon, I would like to request for a supported API that will unlink one or more "Shared Users" to a given "Asset ID". Application: Service Manager Entity: Assets Name: assetSharedUsersRemove Request Parameters: assetId <string/number> <required> userId <string array> <required> Response Parameters: userRemovedCount <string/number> exceptionName <string> exceptionSummary <string> Thanks, Samuel Wood

Good afternoon, I would like to request for a supported API that will link one or more "Shared Users" to a given "Asset ID". Application: Service Manager Entity: Assets Name: assetSharedUsersAdd Request Parameters: assetId <string/number> <required> userId <string array> <required> convertToShared <boolean default:FALSE> <optional> * Response Parameters: userAddedCount <string/number> usersAdded <array> User ID Logon ID Employee ID Email Address Type Home Organization usersNotAdded <array> User ID Reason exceptionName <string> exceptionSummary <string> Notes: The convertToShared request parameter would convert the Asset to a Shared Asset, if it's not currently one, before adding the Shared user(s) The usersAdded response parameter would return the details of the user from Hornbill once added. This might be overkill, and if so, this can be ignored. The usersNotAdded response parameter would return the details of the users not added, and the reason. For example, User ID doesn't exist in Hornbill, or the User ID is, but the account is Suspended or Archived. This might also be overkill, and if so, this can be ignored. Thanks, Samuel Wood

Good afternoon, I would like to request for a supported API that will return the details of all "Shared Users" for a given "Asset ID". I am thinking maybe it should handle the following if possible: Application: Service Manager Entity: Assets Name: getSingleAssetSharedUsers Request Parameters: assetId <string/number> <required> Response Parameters: userCount <string/number> users <array> User ID Logon ID Employee ID Email Address Type Home Organization exceptionName <string> exceptionSummary <string> Thanks, Samuel Wood ps. I have created a new tag "api request" - but please let me know if there is a more appropriate tag to use for API requests

+1 - this would be useful, for sure. We'd need more space for the right-hand side node configuration, and I can see this being possible.

Good afternoon, I hope I've put this in a suitable location, that caters for both the ICF and Workflow. I would like to request the following enhancements when editing Custom Questions in the Custom Form Nodes in the ICF or in Human Tasks. Allow us to pick up a question, and drag it to where we want to be in the list of questions Alternatively, add functionality to the up and down arrows. If we CTRL + click on the Up arrow, it moves the question to the top of the list. Similarly, if doing this to the down arrow, it moves the question to the bottom of the list. Add an order/sequence field to the left-side of the question so we can visually see the sequencing, and allow us to update the sequence number for a question, which will the reorder the questions accordingly (I've seen this behaviour in other Apps) - this could go hand in hand with the up and down arrows, or replace them entirely. Add a Preview Form button so we can see what the form looks or Human Task looks like before we publish it @Richard.Ashton FYI Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @Gerry This is why I think we should be raising these on the forums so you know what is being used and whether or an alternative one could be developed, I guess.

Hi @Gerry, Is there somewhere we can request for a customer-facing API? (maybe a subsection of this forum?) or should we just use this section of the forums? For example, I cannot seem to find any customer-facing APIs on docs.hornbill.com that will allow returning a list of all Shared Users (returning the username, optionally also returning the email address) against a single asset. There is an API for capturing this, but it's on the old API documentation so probably unsupported?

Hi @Steve G, Would Hornbill ever consider having webhook listener capabilities in the future?

+1 - I think this has been requested in the past a few times already, regardless, it doesn't hurt to highlight it again.