samwoo

Well spotted... and the more I think about it... i'm 100% sure I can't wait lol.

Thanks @James Ainsworth! Ooh I can wait to hear about those changes in the future

So I kept wanted to play the game Squad for ages and it was finally on sale... but there had a free period and I was so excited to play it and was so sure I was going to spend my £20 gift card on it. I am so glad I didn't... So I then decided and bought Rust, refunded it after 30 minutes. Got Planet Coaster in the end - having a blast I wish I had a mortgage in the first place :'(

With regards to everything you say in your post, it definitely sounds like this would have to be another Application in it's own right. If we were to think about a solution just for now... in the future when you introduce the feature to allow multiple users as "owners" or "used by" against an asset, is it possible to have a field that is not editable, but simply counts how many users there are in each field (then we can hide the field we don't want to see). Then as per your suggestion to have a single licence count field against the Software Asset. We can then run regular reports to identify how many licences are being used versus the maximum number of licences available. Is that a possible easier solution to work with for the time being? To summarise: Have a non-editable field that counts how many users are stored in the "Owned by" field Have a non-editable field that counts how many users are stored in the "Used by" field Have a single "number" field to store the maximum licences available for that Software Asset This way we can identify the users who are potentially using a licence and if they dont need it, it'll be a lot easier to recycle. It is a major struggle in our organisation for the lots of different applications that we use across different department. We have a procurement officer procuring these licences and some of the licences are Per User / Per Device / Named Licences / Concurrent Licences so when you get into the IT Provisioning and Group Policies which is dealt with by the Technical Support Team, there are some licences that simply cannot be managed in an efficient way and becomes hard to track. It's actually a lot more complicated than this, but if we were able to have a proper way to manage software licences in Hornbill... everything becomes integrated much easier to manage. @gwynne Do you have anything in regards to what @James Ainsworth has said above?

Hello, Are we overdue for additional fields to be added to the assets? I would like to request additional fields but this time for the Computer Class (for Servers) Application Pools | Yes / No Server Location Type | Free Text or Simple List (Cloud / On-premise) Next Patch Date | Date Field Last Patch Date | Date field (To be changed when the Next Patch Date field gets updated) Disaster Recovery? | Yes / No Host Name | Free Text (Can we initiate Remote Desktop Connection using this?) I know i have made some other posts somewhere else on the forums aside from the ones above and this post so I hope these fields can be added soon. To end with before going home: Are there any loving changes coming to Asset Management in the future? I'm not sure it has changed much (it's still good though) so it just got me curious. Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @ArmandoDM! As per @gwynne's request, can the auto-count option be raised as an enhancement? I like the idea from @gwynne about having there be a maximum number of users allocated to an asset set in the Vendor area. Thanks, Samuel

+1 !!! This will complement some of the additional fields I raised to have included here: I never even thought about specifying an amount of licence against an asset and for each user assigned to it, for the count to go down. Your idea is a great idea and I would put it above my request above. We are struggling with licences and finding it difficult to manage the different licences for different products so this would be a godsend. Thank you for posting this idea! Samuel

Hello, I was wondering if this idea has made it's way to discussions and if so was there an outcome? Thanks, Samuel

Hello, The Data Import Configuration along with the later versions of the LDAP Import are amazing tools. I would like to request a feature where we can specify whether or not there is going to be Regex Matching for the Organisations. For example... in AD we have a structure similar to the following: OU = Directors | OU = Relationship Managers | OU = Specialists | |______ OU = HR | |______ OU = IT | |______ OU = Planning I have a Data Import Configuration that will import the whole subtree of users under the Specialists OU. I then want to pull out the Sub OU's which will effectively match the Organization name in Hornbill. The DSN would look something like: CN=First Name,OU=Housing,OU=Specialists,OU=<###>,OU=<####>,DC=<########>,DC=gov,DC=uk The Regex would look like: CN=.*?,OU=(.*?)(?:,[A-Z]+=|$) It would clearly pick up the text within the first OU and use this to populate the user against the matching Organization. https://regex101.com/r/CfavcA/1 Can this be done? Many thanks, Samuel

please add me to all changes related to this +1

Hello, For some co-workers, when navigating to their "Co-Worker" record (Home -> Co-Workers) we are getting the following error: But when checking the record in the Admin Tool and in the Database using SQL, the user ID is set correctly. The only thing that's different is that I am using the latest version of the LDAP Import tool. Can someone assist? (please note we've only found a couple of co-workers so far) Thanks, Samuel

No problem at all. To be honest I've not used that functionality at all xD... but I thought why not see if I can help and that was the first thing I saw and it worked, woo!

Any time Michael, also there are some other options there in the activities tab too if it helps, such as finding the topics you posted in etc. ta

In the Select Ordering tab, have you also tried doing the query with a ticket in the Sort Descending box on the same row where you have Count ticked? Seems to order it in the Data Preview for me, with the highest number at the top - give it a try Thanks, Samuel

At the top of the forums, highlight Activity -> Click "Content I started"

Hi, So if this came onto our instance would it instantly affect our existing boards? If so how much? Just so I can prepare something for the users who uses it. Thanks, Samuel

Hello, How about something that is very similar to Stackoverflow or even Quorra? It could be split into multiple parts / buttons 1. Start a Discussion 2. Share Ideas 3. Ask a question Based on what button was pressed from the above list, followed by the options provided on what the post relates to, will determine where the post will go and pre-tag / group them accordingly. Start a Discussion - Select Discussion types (which will certain features to be enabled) ie. Events, General, Important, Notice, Hornbill Update - Allow there to be voting / poll capabilities - Also include an option to invite users to events via the discussion - Can link back to Ideas or Questions Share Ideas - People can upvote on the most popular answers. - For any changes raised or those already raised at Hornbill to somehow link them straight to the relevant Change Request on your side. - Ideas can be rejected / accepted by Hornbill (with reasons where applicable) - If approved then maybe some form of progress can be highlighted against the Idea (or it could be as simple as Raised / Submitted / Accepted / In Progress / Completed / Released / Rejected) - Can link back to Questions or Discussions Ask a question - People can upvote on the most popular answers. - Can link back to Ideas or Discussions Just throwing an idea around that's all. Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @Daniel Dekel, I hope you don't mind but I had a sneaky F12 peek at how it works, what an amazing feature - something I never knew existed :O I had a little play and can imagine it being troublesome if some sort of feature to tweak the number of cells a row/column can "span" but I managed to achieve something that is sort of what I was requesting for See below - as you can see some of the widgets are a bit narrower. I can understand why this might be something to not be looked at due to it's complexity but what an amazing feature nonetheless. (This screenshot is from Chrome ) Thank you for looking into the issues with the arrows not working in IE11 Samuel

Unfortunately pressing the arrow buttons to change the size of the boxes in IE11 doesn't work I've heard of sites de-supporting IE11 and I'm not surprised as it's an old browser and has less features and will eventually be desupported one way or another. Is this what's happening here? If so I can let my colleagues know to use Google Chrome. (Which is what I prefer to use anyway at least until Edge is allowed to be used in the Business) I understand what you are saying, columns cannot be merged/split in IE11. As for non-IE11 browsers, I wondered if columns and rows can be individually customized, so for example the height or width can be changed maybe by certain fixed % - 25% 50% 75% 100%? For reference when I say 100% I do not mean the full width/height of the container, but for size of the individual card within a cell within the table. If the card should be set to the full width/height of the container, then the arrows that are currently available should be used to do this. Thanks! Samuel

Hello, People have been coming to me with issues using Hornbill Today in IE11... IE11: Chrome: Otherwise it looks really nice in Chrome and we are looking forward to additional nodes that can be added in. Feature Request: Can we have to the ability to fine-tune the height and width to half and quarter sizes? For example in the Chrome screenshot it would be good if the Recently Viewed was narrower to clear any white spaces on the right. The same goes for the Favourites... if I were to expand it down by one, there is a lot of white space that would not appear if we were able to expand by 1/2 instead of the fixed height. Height 1: Height 2: We need a Height 1.5 (or half height) to remove that white-space which I will be unlikely to fill up with additional favourites. Keep up the great work! Samuel

Ah I see, it's a shame it didn't flag up as an error when we first worked on it Could I request for there to be a validation to check and confirm that the referenced stage is active and available otherwise to throw an error if not?

Hello, On the evening of Friday 15th June (omg this date could be a reason for this issue), @Aaron Summers and I worked through every single active Business Process in Hornbill replacing all the existing "Closure" stages with a new version, which we saved as a template prior to doing the work. All the BPM's were amended, and saved without any problems at all (No errors) Come the following week we started to get reports of issues where any new calls raised after we did the work, were failing to get to the closure stage, but when looking at the BPM's... everything was fine. Then I suddenly remembered an SQL script that I could use to identify any errors and pull out the BPM ID: SELECT h_bpm_id BPM_ID, h_bpm_instance.h_name BPM_NAME, h_pk_reference REQUEST_REF, h_datelogged LOGGED_DATE, h_fk_servicename SERVICE, h_catalog CATALOG, h_status STATUS, CONCAT('https://admin.hornbill.com/<instance>/app/com.hornbill.servicemanager/workflow/bpm/!',h_bpm_id) BPM_URL FROM h_itsm_requests JOIN h_bpm_instance ON h_bpm_instance.h_id = h_itsm_requests.h_bpm_id WHERE ( h_bpm_instance.h_state LIKE '%"status":"failed"%' or h_bpm_instance.h_state LIKE '%<error>%' ) AND h_status not in ('status.closed','status.cancelled') order by h_datelogged desc Using the above we were able to pinpoint what was going wrong... it isn't very clear but from my knowledge, when the "Next Stage" node is blank, usually it should just go to the next stage after the current one....right? Well ALL the "Next Stage" nodes on resolution stage were all blank (which is what I think it should be), but every ticket was flagging up an error here... so it seems that using the new Stage Template functionality has not correctly updated the entire Business Process (all of them) to identify that it is in fact the next stage of the process. @Aaron Summers and I have had to go through every single Next Stage node, in every Resolution Stage in every Business Process again and manually point it to the new and improved "Closure" stage. But we've had loads of requests raised since we "fixed" the issue, so we are both having to run the above SQL at regular intervals to manually fix each BPM instance (hence having the link generated for it in the SQL). Just thought to let you know... since I don't think we can bulk resolve it for all requests using SQL... to prevent this issue from happening again in the future. Thanks, Samuel Wood (To add we did test the new Closure stage and it worked at the time, we are not sure what we did differently)

Sorry I meant being able to re-open a ticket, without assigning a Team or Owner. In terms of using the Automated Task to specify a team.... 1. The Service Manager users have to define a team at least (mandatory) when reopening the request manually against a ticket, it would be good if they could just Reopen it to allow an Automated Task to do the work. 2. As all our calls are moved to the Service Desk queue after resolution, we need to make sure that it will re-open back to the team that resolved it in the first place (which could be different from the team it was raised to). I have a forum post about this: I am not sure why actually, this is the way it has always been done since we've started with Hornbill (as far as I know)... before I started supporting it. Any resolved calls gets moved to the Service Desk queue, and closed after 5 days. The beauty is that the resolving team is still stamped against the request in Hornbill, which allows for ease of reporting. If I were to suggest changing it, I will be told no... unless there is a valid reason for having to change it. It's been working so far, but these days we need to automate the reopen process hence the reason I have raised this. To briefly summarise on what's been happening, we are going through a big change here, and as part of the 21C project across the whole council, there is going to be a lot more self service and automation, and I'm just finding ways to improve customer (co-workers from other teams/departments) and staff (Hornbill Service Manager users) experience from the IT side as much as possible in line with this massive change. Telephone calls will become far less (unless for emergency reasons or for users who are unable to log tickets one way or another), and therefore we need to ensure a smooth experience for all with Hornbill. I hope that helps to explain it a bit, please let me know if you need more clarification for anything. Thanks, Samuel

Thanks @TrevorKillick

Do we need to contact them in advance? Thanks, Samuel