samwoo

@Gerry In our case, to export the entire list (of what the user's see when browsing their tickets) to a CSV file might just be enough for our customers to start with. But having a basic reporting module / dashboards within the self service portal would be a great idea, particularly for the managers, and managers of managers (and so forth). Maybe having a Self Service Portal Reporting / Customer Service Portal Reporting job role. But I think they will be happy with exporting their curent list to CSV file for now, at least it's a step in the right direction for something that would benefit them. Thanks, Samuel

Hello, Some of the users of the Self Service Portal (they are mostly managers) are requesting to be able to export their Request List (as well as their Staffs request list). They require this information for auditing purposes, and today someone needed this for a Freedom of information request (ie. how many outstanding calls a team has, and what services they were raised against). The managers do not have access to Hornbill, only the Portal and we do not have the capacity to start doing requests to write reports for this sort of information the customer may require. The customers needs to be able to extract their own (or staff's) information at will. +1 for the original idea of this post by @Martyn Houghton, i hope this can be considered as something to be added into Hornbill in the near future. Thanks, Samuel Wood

Hello, User's are not liking the fact that there are two scrollbars in the Request Lists on the Self Service Portal. They are requesting if it's possble to use the Browser's scrollbar to scroll down the request list, rather than use the scrollbar within the page. Obviously it isn't possible as of current, so I was wondering if we can request this feature, which could be a toggleable setting which if enabled would auto expand the height of the request list and prevent the scrollbars from showing. Thanks,

+ 1 would be great

+ 1 would be great

@Gerry / @James Ainsworth Great news! This is going to be an amazing feature. Thanks for the update. However for attachments (which are not documentation) this might not work? Unless the plugin will keep attachments againsts requests seperate from Documentation then i think it will work. Thanks, Samuel

@Gerry I think @Michael Sharp is referring to having versioning for attachments upload against requests, very much the same way documents are versioned when you upload to replace an existing one (or when you update one). I think this is a good idea. +1 For example we have an Change Request form that gets filled out and uploaded to the Change Request. Sometimes it doesn't contain all the information, so we upload the first version to kick off the CAB process. Once we have more information, we add it to the form and re-upload it. But the issue is that we can then eventually get 4 or 5 attachments for each version of the form, alongside other attachments related to a Change Request. This can be a problem when people don't put the version of the form in the title. We need to keep all the versions of the form in a single place, so having versioning for attachments would be a great idea. Thanks, Samuel

+1 this would benefit us too

(shhh I'm still on holiday :P) +1 my colleagues have complained about this before, why put a reason when sometimes the sub-status are reason enough. an option to make the reason mandatory or not as well as hidden or not would be great. also +1 regarding the visibility option too.

+1 @Dan Munns - this is something we would also like to have. I reckon it should be toggleable on the Progressive Capture though, but off by default.

Hi @Ehsan, This is definitely great help, many thanks! It's a shame the list of templates are not held in a table though. Request Incoming.... May I make a request to possibly have the template details stored in a table on Hornbill? I'm sure this will make improvements in other areas such as the BPM where it would be possible to search for a template rather than having to know the name of it, as well as activating or deactivating the template. I will do this as a mini-project using the details you provide above (again many thanks for that :D) when I get back from holiday. Samuel

Hello, I was wondering if someone can guide me in find out what Email Templates we are not using (the ones that are set up in the Admin Tool). There were LOADs of templates set up before I started to take on Hornbill, and now we need to do a mass tidy up, I was just wondering if there was an easy way to identify what is currently being used againsts the services, settings etc. and list all the ones that are not being used. Thanks, Samuel

Hi @Steve G, Fantastic! This has worked! Many thanks for the assist - I am now able to use the xmlmc module in Powershell. I will update the module once you have added the extra functionality. Cheers, Samuel

Hi @Steve G, Thanks for this - I had already done the above when I was looking into Power BI a few weeks ago. It hasn't helped with the xmlmc module This is the message I received when I run the module: We are using single sign-on, also I am using an API key set against the very first user that was created when Hornbill was set up, not an API key set against my username in Hornbill - could this be the reason? Thanks, Samuel

Hi @Steve G, Can you advise how we can access Hornbill through a proxy using this new module? I must be missing something obvious. THanks, Samuel

Hi @Steve G, This is awesome! I will certainly be having a look at this +1 Many thanks, Samuel

Hi @Bob Dickinson, Clear and concise, thanks! i will take this to my team and discuss Cheers, Samuel

Hello again, This problem seems to be intermittent. Some tickets are found some are not there doesn't seem to be a pattern to this. I just did a Global Search on a random request visible on the request list in front of me, and it said no results found. Another colleague has confirmed this is happening as well. Thanks, Samuel

Hello @Chaz, @Pamela Thanks for getting in touch. I'm not sure what's going on but now we are able to search for Requests in the Global Search and in the emails now. We haven't done anything differently since I created this post. Very strange. We'll keep an eye on it for longer. Thanks, Samuel

Hi @Chaz, Sorry I meant to say Global Search instead of Bar at the top - no sadly not able to find any requests using it Do we need to re-index? Thanks, Samuel

Hello, Yesterday around about lunch time we had an issue where our entire Hornbill instance went down. No one could do anything, and kept getting an error message when refresh or opening Hornbill. When I went onto the Hornbill Support website yesterday, every check in the instance checker was red with the word "Failed" underneath each of them. I was about to log a call using the Hornbill Support website and as I was starting to write, Hornbill came back and everything seemed to be ok. Now we are unable to search for tickets in the Search box at the top... but can find them when filtering the Request List. For example searching for SR00031029 or SR*31029 come up with No Results found in the search bar. But if we go to the Request List -> All My Services and filter on SR00031029, it is found. Also users have been reporting that they are unable to apply emails to tickets. I've just had a go at it, by sending an email into Hornbill based on the response from a customer and a third party in my outlook. When going into Hornbill to Apply email to ticket, it comes up with my name - I click on it, then search for the Request Reference of the call that's under the customer's name - nothing happens when doing the search. As i am unable to access the Customer Support (i type in my instance id and email address and nothing happens on both IE and Chrome) I am logging these issues here. Thanks, Samuel

Hi, I think this is similar to my request here: I will watch this space as well as it's something that would benefit us. +1 Thanks, Samuel

Hello, I was wondering if someone can clarify a query I have about Configuration Manager. At the moment it said that it's free for the first 250 CI's policies configured. Does this mean we will be charge only where we define a relationship between assets? If we were to install Configuration Manager and not configure any Policies (for now), for example just to view the hierarchy of Linked Assets, will there still be any costs involved? Sorry for my confusion, Samuel

Hi Daniel, Just wondering if there was any update on this? We had someone who left who did not share most of their documents with anyone, this resulted in me having to set myself as the owner of their documents via the tables which I don't like to do :'(. Another Request Can I request for an ability to define a "default" role that will be applied to every single document, for ones that already exist and for new ones? For example a "Documentation Super User" role, which means if anyone has this role, they can go in and make amendments to documents by being able to do the following Updating the meta - can be defined as a setting Updating the documents - can be defined as a setting Ability to share documents with other users - can be defined as a setting Ability to share documents to libraries - can be defined as a setting CAN NOT change the owner of the document - can NOT be defined as a setting This will resolve most of the issues we are currently having where a lot of our documentation are not shared with anyone despite numerous attempts to get users to do this... Many thanks, Samuel

@nasimg do you mean preventing the user to be able to select certain categories ie. LAS, but able to select the categories below it such as Care Plan or Review? If so i think that is a good idea. +1 but i don't think it's possible at the moment - someone from Hornbill can correct me. But... You can limit the list of Categories against a Service for each request type: For example if you select LAS, when they log or resolve a ticket they will only be able to see everything underneath it, but they wouldn't see categories on the same level as LAS such as LCS, iCasework or above. You would set it against a Service under each type, see Request Category Level and Resolution Category Level at the bottom of my screenshot. Is this the answer you are looking for? Thanks, Samuel