Keith

Hi, Just wanted to ask a quick question regarding how the mail routing to a team is designed to work. I set a specific team to allocate to in my mail routing config (se below). However this is overridden by any team allocation in the BPM. Does this make it pointless to set any team within the Routing template?

OK @Steven Boardman I'll continue to test and report back if I don't see any improvement.

Thansk @Steven Boardman much appreciated. Lets see what the team have to save regarding performance.

Hi @Steven Boardman Actually, having just tested again it IS working! BUT!!! it is taking an age to update the request with the document section and document link. Any idea whats impacting the performance? Cheers Keith

Thanks @Steven Boardman it's odd that I'm not seeing any errors despite setting "no" in the continue on error field.

Hi @Steven Boardman I am trying to achieve exactly what you demonstrate above but am unable to get this working for some reason. Any idea where I'm going wrong? I do not receive any error or indication that something has gone wrong in the process.

I need help in figuring out how I can implement the following. I am trying to implement a process to gather UAT testing. A user must provide UAT testing within 5 days. However, I want us to be reminded to chase the user at 3 days. My intention was to have a task that has a start date, a due date and an expiry. Start is immediate Due would be 5 days Expiry would also be 5 days. Ideally I want to send an email to the request owner at 3 days. BUT I don't see a way to have a custom expression to that can do this. What other options do I have? Can I set an expiry that is earlier than the due date and use the expiry to trigger the email? but still leave the task available to choose an outcome after the expiry? I could consider breaking out into more actions/steps but I will need to be able to report on whether we completed within the due date, therefore think it will be much easier to do this if everything is contained in one task. Thanks for any help you can offer.

Hi, Would it be possible to add some indication as to whether a request is present on a board or not (Boards app). This would be veery helpful in the context of managing our development queue. Thanks for considering. Keith

+1 This has been raised with me too. Analysts are finding these very difficult to read in the request list.

Hi @James Ainsworth, thanks for confirming. Would have been nice if there was some form of sequencing option but I can't have everything Cheers Keith

Quick question... If I setup parallel processing in my BPM where each parallel process has human tasks, is there a way to control what order the tasks appear in related requests? Thanks Keith

+1 for this and the suggestion to filter templates.

@Victor Thanks for the offer. I'll need to have an infrastructure colleague reach out to you who can decide where the utility will live. I have no access to these locations and/or AD setup. Thats were the resource constraint comes in.

Thanks @Chaz and @Victor - Resources, priorities etc etc. largely out of my hands unfortunately

The release notes for Service Manager build 1616 refers to refactoring for API hardening. Specifically it mentions that LDAP is not affected. Does this include the older LDAP method?

Thanks a lot @Victor thats a good start point - OK @Dan Munns, spill the beans. Appreciate anything you can share on the topic.

Thanks @Victor This feature will be really useful. Now if only you could find a way to parse/extract/validate certain information in the body please

Can someone expand on what this automation provides? I assume this in only for the initial email which generates the request and that this works whether a request was raised directly via the email from the mailbox or auto generated via mail routing? What details can be retrieved? And is there any way to retrieve specific information from the mail subject or body for use as part of the process.

Thanks @Victor - I'd add reporting to those areas where this is visible also.

This is good to know @Victor, I hadn't appreciated that. Do you have any tips in marking the team as no longer used as it will still appear in the organisations area in admin (for anyone looking)?

I would like to remove a team which is no longer in use. All open and on-hold requests have been reassigned to an alternative team. In speaking to support they advise that even all closed requests should be reassigned to an alternative team. However, I see that this would have a couple of issues: 1. This would have an impact on past reporting 2. How would this impact the request owner, since the alternative team assigned may not have the same team members? I can't leave the team in place as I fear it will be incorrectly assigned to (we have some services which are open to all teams). One major concern, is what would happen if a user reopened a resolved request (which I have not reassigned). Would it be possible in future to mark teams as archived so that they are inactive and provide an alternative team for assignment purposes. Regards Keith

Hi @Daniel Dekel, great! Thanks!

I notice that there has been a change to the display of the activity whereby it now shows an icon for the due date. This seems to make the activity appear larger which wastes a lot of space if you have a lot of activities. Would it be possible to suppress the display of the icon if no due date is set?

+1

I'd be interested in a taking a look at Supplier manager too.