SJEaton

Thanks @Victor I can't find this? where should I be looking? Sam

No worries. Glad they've found the defect. Hopefully they can fix it soon Sam

Hi @Victor I can confirm your theory is tested for 2). The manual update moved the request on. (SR00037947 was the test) Sam

Hi @Victor 1) yes it resumed when I did a manual update 2) the thing about this one is that it would defeat the object of what I'm trying to achieve i.e. the request owner for unlock payroll request wont have to worry about updating the I Want to Appoint request as the process will do that automatically Sam

Hi @Victor, a gentle nudge re this issue. Any ideas on what I can use for the 6th date/time field so that it pulls through the date correctly? Thanks Sam

Hi @Victor, ok so I've tested this out and it does work in the fact that it does wait. However, when the update comes in from the linked request, it doesn't move the process on ie update the timeline with 'The BP is now resumed' (I left this in to see if it worked) or do the next steps in my test process. My test BPM is called 'HRA I Want to Appoint Process - v7.0 (to test linked requests suspend and update)' and it's on the 'On-boarding - New Starter' stage where I've configured what you suggested. The ref no of the test request is SR00037440 and the linked request it raised is SR00037443. The BP for the linked request (HRA Unlock Payroll) updates the original request timeline when a HT is actioned and this update is what I want to then move the original request process on to the next task. Hopefully you can take a look and advise what's missing? Sam

Hi It doesn’t seem to be possible to highlight a number of emails in a hornbill mailbox to then forward all the emails together to someone. Can you confirm? If its not possible is it something that can be looked at? Sam

Hi @Victor, thanks for the update and guidance, I'm just catching up after a holiday so will have a go when I get a minute and let you know how it goes. I'm really really glad! I definitely like it all laid out in user friendly descriptions so my brain doesn't melt haha Sam

Hi @James Ainsworth, thanks for confirming. Sam

Thanks all for supporting this idea!

Ah ok, that's definitely it but the reason I have this particular Service not visible as that all catalogue items in it are only for ServiceDesk ie.I don't want it visible on the Portal. Doh! I'll have to have a rethink, thanks Steven. Sam

I ran out of date/time custom fields to use so had to use another custom field (I don't now what varchar means??) The PC is an overtime claim form and therefore 06/05/2018 00:00 was selected from the date/time picker as a claim date/time (custom field L). I then have h_custom_l as the variable in the email but it has displayed as 30-04-2018 23:00. It must be something to do with me using custom L but can you advise what we could use instead if we run out of date/time fields? Sam

Hi @Victor, we are now at Build 1221 but still have the issue with the date/time showing different to what was entered in the PC. The error only occurs when the custom field is A-T and not if we use one of the new date/time format one's (21-25). Attached is an email extract showing the issue. The first five dates shown use custom fields 21-25 so are correct but as there are only 5 date/time custom fields I used custom L for the sixth entry which is displayed incorrectly (see highlighted). This should show 06/05/2018 00:00 but shows 30-04-2018 23:00. This isn't even one hour before anymore so not sure what's going on? The service request is SR00034560 in case you need it. Thanks Sam

Hi We have a number of services that now raise requests from emails received in Hornbill Mailboxes which helps manage workloads and also means we can track requests better and provide the customer with emails if needed. We have discovered a downside to this however which is that if a request is raised in this way (i.e. by an analyst via Hornbill Live and not the customer via the self-service portal), the customer can't then view the request and any updates made to it via the self service portal. Why is this? Surely they should be able to view if they are the customer, even if the analyst raised the request? Sam

Portal (not sure what Collaboration Core is?)