Jump to content

DougA

Hornbill Users
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by DougA

  1. Today is my last day at Hampshire Fire and Rescue so no more stupid questions from me. I'm leaving HFRS in a much better state than when I joined thanks to all of the help and assistance from Hornbill staff. Often you didn't even know you were helping but your clear and full help and advice to all users where often a godsend when I was struggling. I'd also like to thank the community as well. Your willingness to offer advice and tips has been much appreciated.

    I wish you all well in your eternal struggle against recalcitrant systems and obstinate users.

    Regards

    Doug

     

    • Like 2
  2. I'm in the process of converting our written procedures into Hornbill. Most of them are a single activity which is working well for us. However, I'm now into the more complex procedures where multiple activities are required, assigned to different teams but occur concurrently.

    Unless I'm very much mistaken activities are sequential. I did try putting the activities into a parallel process but I was getting a rather complex error when completing an activity

    Here is the error message returned for this workflow: 
    decision ("585d6fbe-21a1-8429-7be9-b722f46e52bd"/"decision-5d2fa708-96cd-4598-cd5d-7c68c0e563c2") execute: at 1/497: "Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'tasks' of undefined"
    (function(){ var outcome=false;if(functions.pcf===undefined){functions.pcf = function(formId,questionId){ var pcfForms = {}; if(typeof global["flowcode"]["syspcfanswers"] ==="string")	{try{ 	pcfForms = JSON.parse(global["flowcode"]["syspcfanswers"]); if(typeof pcfForms[formId] === "object"){if(pcfForms[formId].hasOwnProperty(questionId)){return pcfForms[formId][questionId];}}}catch(e){};}return "";}};var task=global["TASKS"][global["currentStage"]]["task-2477fae1-3912-4872-f324-ba97f114a583"]["tasks"][0];if(task["response"] && task["response"]["result"] && task["response"]["result"]["params"]) {	if(task["response"]["result"]["params"]["status"]=="expired"){		outcome="expired";	}	else{		outcome=task["response"]["result"]["params"]["outcome"];	}}"
    ----------------------------------------
    (function(){ var outcome=false;if(functions.pcf===undefined){functions.pcf = function(formId,questionId){ var pcfForms = {}; if(typeof global["flowcode"]["syspcfanswers"] ==="string")	{try{ 	pcfForms = JSON.parse(global["flowcode"]["syspcfanswers"]); if(typeof pcfForms[formId] === "object"){if(pcfForms[formId].hasOwnProperty(questionId)){return pcfForms[formId][questionId];}}}catch(e){};}return "";}};var task=global["TASKS"][global["currentStage"]]["task-2477fae1-3912-4872-f324-ba97f114a583"]["tasks"][0];if(task["response"] && task["response"]["result"] && task["response"]["result"]["params"]) {	if(task["response"]["result"]["params"]["status"]=="expired"){		outcome="expired";	}	else{		outcome=task["response"]["result"]["params"]["outcome"];	}}
     return [(outcome== "Cancelled") == true,(true) == true]; })()
    

    Is there a way to accomplish parallel activities?

    Thanks

    Doug

  3. oh what fun. I've spent most of the day closing requests that should have auto-closed. Looks like I'm going to have loads more to do after the next release.

    My question to Hornbill, if this is a known issue presumably caused by changes in the previous version and causes a shedload of work for your users don't you think you should:-

    1. Let your customers know
    2. Supply a fix ASAP
    3. What options are available for bulk closing requests?.
  4. We have a very simple e-mail routing to create a new incident when an email with a specific subject is received. It's been working for ages but for some reason it's not working, there are 3 emails in the inbox that should be processed automatically. I've looked in the log and it just seems to be this sequence repeatedly.

    Capture.thumb.PNG.0602663c459e7b34385dbf02edaa68f1.PNG

    Any suggestions as to what might be going wrong?

    Thanks

    Doug

  5. Hi @James Ainsworth,

    At the moment all of the documents are in a network share but we can either put them into SharePoint or Document Manager.

    My thought process is to be able to allow the analysts to open the procedure document from the request as easily as possible. That way they've got no excuse for not following procedures :D 

    The key to opening up this functionality is to have a few more variables including the custom fields available when setting up a custom button. At the moment all of the variables are used and can't be repurposed. Originally I was thinking of setting a custom field with the document details from within the BP. Alternatively the folder (or library) could be the same as the Service Name and the document the same as the Config Item.

    Hope that makes sense!

    Doug

  6. Hi,

    I'm trying to find a way to tie our documentation into the Service Manager console. At the moment it doesn't look as though I can use anything other than request info. As we can set custom fields in BP it would be brilliant to have them included in the fields selectable in custom buttons.

    That way I can set up the BPs to set the document required into the custom field and click on the button to view the document.

    Cheers

    Doug

  7. Ok, seeing as I haven't asked anything for a few days here's the dumb question for the day.

    I asked a few users to test the service portal for me and report back with their opinions. Unfortunately they're getting this error.

    err.jpg.9954705977d5e82f1f38b1cac5f6cb8a.jpg

     

    I'm sure I've seen something about permissions to this table but I can't find it now. Can you point me in an appropriate direction?

    Thanks

    Doug

  8. I've created an activities board for our loan process. An activity is created and scheduled for when equipment is due to go out. When that activity is completed another one is created for the return of equipment. I've spent quite a bit of time on it setting up all of the conditions and I'd now like to have all of the frontline team use this.

    I can't see an obvious way of sharing it so the question is do I have to recreate it for each of the analysts? Finally can a basic user be given permissions to view the board?

    Thanks

    Doug

  9. On ‎10‎/‎04‎/‎2017 at 10:32 AM, DougA said:

    Thanks @Victor,

    Funny enough that was the solution I came up with! It's a bit crude though and doesn't actually assist in triage.

    My Options

    1. Don't have the CI. The Service is displayed and can be selected.
      1. Create a ProCap that somehow loops until a valid selection is made.
    2. Set up a dummy CI. Can't stop someone from selecting it and the service/CI can't subsequently be edited.

    Hornbill Options

    1. Do not display Services without CI.
    2. Do not allow selection of Services without CI. servicemanager.progressiveCapture.servicedetails.catalogRequired enforces the selection of a CI if there is one. Perhaps a setting could be provided to block the selection of the service itself?

    Thanks

    Doug

    @Victor,

    Any further thoughts on my issue?

    Is there a way to force the user to reselect the service/CI? At the moment it just goes into an infinite loop if I loop back on an invalid service. In the service portal the problem doesn't exist as the user can't select just the service.

    Thanks

    Doug

  10. Thanks @Victor,

    Funny enough that was the solution I came up with! It's a bit crude though and doesn't actually assist in triage.

    My Options

    1. Don't have the CI. The Service is displayed and can be selected.
      1. Create a ProCap that somehow loops until a valid selection is made.
    2. Set up a dummy CI. Can't stop someone from selecting it and the service/CI can't subsequently be edited.

    Hornbill Options

    1. Do not display Services without CI.
    2. Do not allow selection of Services without CI. servicemanager.progressiveCapture.servicedetails.catalogRequired enforces the selection of a CI if there is one. Perhaps a setting could be provided to block the selection of the service itself?

    Thanks

    Doug

  11. We've built up our services and for each request type added the appropriate Config Items. Some of these services might not have any of a particular request type but it still gets displayed.

    For instance the Procurement service doesn't have any CIs for the Incident request type.

    Capture.PNG.19cbda167d6535749f3262b04bf3bc51.PNG

    But it does have CIs for the Service Request.

    Capture1.PNG.dffa82738ea9218767d74664996a45f8.PNG

    servicemanager.progressiveCapture.servicedetails.catalogRequired and servicemanager.progressiveCapture.servicedetails.enableSupportVisibility have both been set on. For a service request the analyst must select a CI but there's nothing to stop them selecting the Service in Incidents. I've added a test in the PC to see if a CI has been selected or not but I can't see how to force a different selection. If I loop back to the beginning the service form is skipped because it's already been answered which puts the PC in a never ending loop. I've left the Incident configuration settings blank but that just loads the default PC.

    Ideally I wouldn't want them to even see the Service if there isn't a CI. At least that way they wouldn't be able to select it! Any suggestions on how to get round this?

    Thanks

    Doug

     

  12. Hi @Martyn Houghton,

    I agree. In the Portal the customer details are provided via the account logged in; the request details by the input form and the service details by the selection of the Service and CI before switching to the Procap specified in the CI where the request details form is presented.

    The app requests the customer details, Request details and Service details via the relevant forms. It then switches to the procap specified in the CI. The request details form isn't presented again as it's already been gathered.

    Capture.PNG.f0026deaced539bff495db1b19b98ff4.PNG

    So how on earth do I present different procaps depending on where it's being logged, Portal or App? I can't see an easy way to re-use code and I really don't want the headache of maintaining separate CIs and Procaps.for the portal or app.

    We want to provide a very simple impact/urgency matrix to the user with a more complex selection for the analyst. For instance an end-user can't log a major incident but analysts can. Having the ability to set a condition on the source would allow slight variations to the procap.

    Regards

    Doug

  13. Hi @Gerry, @Mohamed

    I must be missing something REEAAALLLYYY obvious.

    app.itsm.progressiveCapture.newSelfService is set to run a default PC but as far as I can tell it never runs.

    We've set up all of the services and the associated catalog items each of which defines the PC to run. Self Service presents the Services for selection and then the Configuration Items which runs the PC. Both self-service and analysts are being presented the same form. I haven't seen where you can set a different PC for self service.

    Do I have to duplicate every single CI one for the analysts and one for self-Service? Would that mean I'd then need to duplicate the PC but leaving out the priority?

    Thanks

    Doug

×
×
  • Create New...