Daniel Dekel

@Giuseppe Iannacone, this was done in purpose, but only with Tasks created by the BPM. Manual Tasks are still allowing Follow Up. Let me know if is a problem for you and if it is, can you please give me an example of why? @Martyn Houghton sorry but I don't understand about the "visibility". In what area are you talking about? Thanks, Daniel.

Hi @Martyn Houghton, Let me have a chat with the SM team about this so see what they think. Also, this needs to be extended to be supported by Service Manager, otherwise you will not be able to do anything with the language in the BPM. I'll get back to you.

Hi @Martyn Houghton, Sorry just back from holidays (well, not really sorry for that ;-) ) Let me have a chat with another team about this so see what they think. I'll get back to you.

Hi @dwalby, Practically yes, you cold achieve a similar result. But there are a few differences. Checklist in the task: Gives you a visual representation on the tasks list that leads to 100% completed. You can check gradually without completing the task You can also see the state of completion in the Board Manager App if you use it. Custom Fields Checklist: Can only be checked once the task has to be completed Value of the list can be used within the BPM flow Is still experimental although quite stable Hope this helps, Daniel

Hi @samwoo, We've just pushed that fix to Live. Can you just refresh the browser and see if the problem was solved? Thanks, Daniel.

Hi @samwoo, Yesterday morning we pushed a build to Live that is it finds issues in the configuration it shows this error message. This can be the evidence of the sync problem (caching) we had been talking. Did you or someone change today the Progressive Capture? Was a Dynamic Data field added or changed? Regarding the Date fields, I don't find a relation to this issue. Can you provide more info about that problem? Perhaps a screenshot? Thanks, Daniel.

Thanks @Ricky Watts, We were able to replicate the problem. It should be fixed for our next Collaboration Core build. Sorry for the inconvenience. If we don't find further issues, we will push a build of collaboration core tomorrow morning. Thanks, Daniel.

Hi @Ricky Watts, If you refresh (F5) and the try to forward the email, will it work? I'm asking because it it does work, then is related to a defect that we fixed and will be shipped with the next Collaboration Core build. Thanks, Daniel.

Thank you @Aaron Summers for the information. I wanted to let you know ( also @samwoo and @Kelvin ) that although we could not replicate the problem, we did find an issue in the code and is related to one of the files being cached in both server and client. In the next build, the file will only be cached against the application version (like Service Manager) , as it should had been done from the beginning. We hope this was the cause of the problem but if you find similar issues after the next build please let us know. Thank you, Daniel.

@dwalby I won't be able to tell you exactly as many people are on vacations now and the change needs to be done across various teams. A rough estimate is about a month.

@dwalby, Regarding LDAP import, it could be possible. You will have to concatenate the string "sip:" as a prefix to the Skype username. We store the the IM type + : + Username in the h_sn_e column of the h_sys_accounts table. The IM in your case is "sip" so in your case you will have to import "sip:YOUR_USER" Regarding using the button in the request details, I don't think it would be difficult to add, but will have to speak to my colleagues in Service Manager team. Regarding showing the availability, well, that is a lot more complicated, because that will require us storing your skype credentials. So we can have a look in to that, but is not going to be soon I'm afraid. Daniel.

Hello @dwalby, We do have the option to set a SKype For Business user. If you go to My Profile -> Contact Details section. By setting this it will show a Skype icon when you open someone's profile in the popup. Usually hover over the user image. Is that what you were looking for?

@Giuseppe Iannacone, I'm glad you like it. The version you are using now is quite stable and I doubt we will make big changes other than improvements. I suggest you first check if you have everything you need, if all the fields and outcomes have the features you need. This will probably be the version that will be replacing the current activities. Daniel.

Yes you can @Giuseppe Iannacone. Is the same configuration as in the Progressive Capture's custom form.

Yes @Giuseppe Iannacone, you can add extra fields to the task. There are two types; general fields and outcome specific fields. In your case I guess you want a general. Go to the task details in the BPM and add a field where it says Capture Task Fields.

@samwoo, we were able to reproduce the problem with "All Sites" and it could be related to caching although we could not replicate the cache issue. We simulated a case where a specific file we use to hold the configuration is not being updated (is cached), in this case, the specific query (like all sites) could not have existed yet, and therefore it shows the specific error. We added a distinctive error message if we find that problem and that might guide us to find if that is the issue or not. We will keep trying to replicate the caching issue. To your question about if users should clear their cache, my answer is no, our system should do that automatically and as you can see, for most is working. In our next build it will be more evident if there is a bigger problem by seing that error message. We'll keep updating you on this. Daniel.

Hello all, We pushed a new build with updates to the new Activity View. This includes: 1. Reason Field added by default - It will be possible to remove it with a new option that will be added to the Admin Tool soon. 2. BPM Approvals - Is now possible to reassign 3. Defects fixes Thanks, Daniel.

@Jeremy, regarding the width of the outcomes, two things will be added, one it will expand up to a max size, so as long as you don't have a very long text, it will display. If you do have a very long text, you can add a description to the outcome in the admin tool and it will be displayed as tooltip when you hover over. It will also display the outcome label as a tooltip. Should be soon. Daniel

@Dan Munns, we will implement a delegation feature for tasks. But, till that is done, we will allow reassigning the task to someone else in the case of Approvals.

@Aaron Summers, you can sort by status in any folder so you can see the ones you want at the top.

@Gary.Reynolds, yes, as I've mentioned to Martyn too, we will add an option to hide the reason, so by default it will be visible. Your current tasks will get back to how they were before. Daniel.

@samwoo the only thing a user should do is to refresh the page in case the Progressive Capture was already loaded, but it shouldn't require to clear the cache. We'll have to test this, I remember you mentioned this in the past, or perhaps another customer? I'll raise a defect for this mainly to investigate the caching issue. Regarding your requirement about Site Name, I'll catch up with James and see where that is. But we can continue that from the other post. Thanks.

@Aaron Summers Hello, We are still unable to replicate this issue. Can you provide us with more details? What browser and Operating System does the Basic use? I understand this is the only Progressive Capture (PC) that he has a problem. Is there any other PC that has the Sites List dropdown or this is the only one? The previous customer that had this issue mentioned that he uninstalled Chrome and installed it again and it started working. I wonder if the customer has some Extension or Plugin in his browser that could interfere with our logic? Perhaps you can ask him also if he can disable the extensions/plugins and try again? Or try this with a different Browser? @samwoo, I think your case is different, correct me. You can still see the Sites List, but what you require is to store the Site Name rather than the Site ID in the answers, is that correct? In this case it would be a feature request and not a defect. Thanks, Daniel.

@Dan Munns, yes that is the expected behaviour. Please read the section 3 of this post in the BPM Approvals (Authorisation). Daniel.

Yes @Martyn Houghton, that's the idea ;-)