samwoo

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

@Victor thanks Fingers crossed for this idea

I can totally understand why it shouldn't be on by default, however there are sources we know and trust that wouldn't have all the extra attachments and signatures so I'm pleased that it's on the Dev List for development at some point in the future Thanks, Samuel

Ah no it doesn't, since its an automated email from an external system from another company so no way to generate a Hornbill reference to include in the subject or body. I guess there is no way to do this. Thanks @Victor, Samuel

See this post: Someone asked a similar question a little while ago - maybe now Hornbill might have an answer of some sort @Victor - might you know?

Thanks @Vic, Can I request for an enhancement for the ordering of the list to sort by Status first (status.open, status.onhold, status.resolved) then by Request Reference? Hmm it doesn't seem to be doing that for us, if I were to open an email from within the Request to re-apply the non-attached attachments to the ticket, I have to manually find the Request Reference or paste it in to select it... is something amiss here? Thanks, Samuel

Annnnnnnd i've put this topic in the wrong location - it should be under "System Administration" -> "Business Process Automation"

Hello, I would like to request the ability to auto-add associated assets to a request via the BPM. The node should have the following options: 1. To choose the type of entity (ie. Owner / Customer / Connection of specific type - where there is only one of that type in the connections list) 2. To choose the types of Assets Types to add (All, single type or multiple types) 3. To choose whether or auto-add associated assets where the entity is the "Owned by" and/or "Used by" or both, with the potential to add other fields as new ones are introduced in the future In particular for Leaver Requests, this would be extremely useful to return ALL the existing assets the leaver connection entity owns or uses. Thanks, Samuel

Hi @NeilWJ, That would be great - at least to make it more presentable upon opening it without having to make it manually look good each time you open it (especially when running them frequently). If there is a possibility of automatically showing the filter arrows as well would be great. Cheers! Samuel

Hello, Every night we receive an email from another company into the Hornbill inbox which contains files we need to upload into another system. We have an auto-routing rule which creates the ticket in Hornbill automatically. Because we cannot set this auto-routing rule to automatically apply attachments to the request, we are having to manually go into the email using the Source: Email then ticking the attachments to apply them to the request. However... I was curious as to why the "related" requests are sorted in an order where the "Open" tickets are on the last page? And is there an explanation as to why the email is unable to auto-identify the request that I am applying the attachments to after a ticket has already been raised for it using the Auto-Routing rule? If we have the option within a specific auto-routing rule to auto-attach files (they have no signatures or any other images) then we wouldn't need to do this... If this is not going to be an option for now or at all, I was wondering if the order of requests when applying an email to a ticket be changed accordingly so the Open tickets are on the first page? See the open ticket is on the last page. Can this be improved in any way? Thanks, Samuel

Hi @James Ainsworth and @Martyn Houghton, Thank you both for your input. Some interesting ideas from Martyn, and to include any sort of configuration for this - having it in the Service Desk app sounds like reasonable location. Since as of current we are the only department using Hornbill, calls start from Tech Support (Service Desk), then follows the Applications Team, then follows Infrastructure, so everyone can have visibility of everything and anyone reassign a call to the relevant teams should the need to do so arises. We obviously do have each teams broken down into more detail on Hornbill but that is the "essence" of how we work and provide the service we can. Thank you! Samuel

Hello @ArmandoDM, Thanks for your assistance, I am getting the hang of the Service Manager reporting a little bit. I recently found out that I could actually in fact use part SQL in a custom query to reference other tables if necessary. Anyhow I will take on your suggestions and give this another go later today. Many thanks, Samuel Wood