Giuseppe Iannacone
-
Posts
481 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Enhancement Requests
Posts posted by Giuseppe Iannacone
-
-
@Steven Boardman is there the possibility to add the attachment of ticket 1 to ticket 2 (ticket2 is generated via BPM)
-
+1 for this
-
thank you @Steven Boardman but this will be to much complicated for an already complex process, is there a way to add this template from the BPM instead of linking it to the doc manager?
-
@Steven Boardman i was able to link a document with ibridge... but the result is no what i was expecting...
I now see the section documents, but how can be done what you stated before?
"those working on the request can take the template, add their details and save as either a new document and linked to the request or as an attachment (rather than editing the template document itself) "
-
On 4/9/2018 at 5:19 PM, trevorharris said:
Sorry, we don't the facility to change ownership of a library (as we do for documents) currently, however we're aware of this problem and are planning to introduce this feature in the near future. Will update you here when we have release it.
Thanks
Trevor H
We will also need this feature, is this in a change backlog? is there any estimated time?
-
On 5/26/2018 at 5:19 PM, Steven Boardman said:
@Giuseppe Iannacone are you familiar with using the Hornbill iBridge? if so there is already an option which allows you to automatically link a document from document manager to a request as part of a business process. So if you store your template document in document manager and then in your business process you can use the following option to have the template automatically linked to the request, those working on the request can take the template, add their details and save as either a new document and linked to the request or as an attachment (rather than editing the template document itself)
Where Document is is like: DOC20180500000090 (i.e not the full URL path)
If you haven't used the ibridge before have a read of the following which will include how to set up a keysafe which you will need to enter in the Request Credentials field
https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Hornbill_iBridge
And specifically what you need for Hornbill integration calls
https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Hornbill_Integration_Bridge
Hope that helps
Steve
This looks to be exactly what i was looking for, I will give it a try and eventually i will ask some suggestions in case of need, but for now, THANK YOU!
-
we do have a complex onboarding process and this of course reflects to the BPM, we do have also many different teams working on the request and we would like to collect user's informations like user account, email address, user licenses and other useful stuff into a document, so at this poit it might be very usefull to have the template document already available into the request and this should be easily edited by each teams appending the infos.
Any suggestion would be highly appreciated.
-
19 minutes ago, Victor said:
I confirm that this solved the issue
-
we are experiencing this issue
-
On 5/14/2018 at 9:00 PM, Steven Boardman said:
@Dan Munns we do have an existing story to allow the promotion of more attributes from the originating request when creating a linked one. We have custom fields in the requirements. I have added you as interested and will update as this moves forward.
Steve
please add me too
-
10 minutes ago, Victor said:
I'm afraid not... You need to select them manually... SHIFT + select and CTRL + select work though...
that's good enough for the purpose, thank you
-
Nice, is there a select all and mark as read? this is useful for the automated processed emails from the routing rule
-
another challenge, having the ticket 1 collecting the infos via Prog Capture, and having the BPM opening a linked ticket2, how can I have human tasks for ticket 2 with the collected info of PC of ticket 1?!?
we were using this sintax with the previous approach (1 ticket with multiple tasks for different teams, now we would like to have multiple tickets for different teams and each with potentially multiple tasks)
-
ok that's a big deal! yeah it wasn't clearly specified and I supposed was only a new request.
in this case the creation from of a linked request from the email routing rule is no more relevant.
thank you!
-
- Is there a way to filter the email items not read?
in the examples we have 6 items and it's hard to identify them when you have a lot of item in the folder
-
23 minutes ago, Victor said:
@Giuseppe Iannacone I am a bit lost by the title... raise a new linked request from an email? Sorry, must be my morning intake of coffee not to the required level yet... May I ask to give me an example to make sure I understand what you need?
sorry the title should have been "Raise New Linked Request from BPM or an email"
-
we do have a complex BPM in which more then 5 teams are involved and the tasks on a single request are a great limit for us. so the idea is to open diferrent linked request from a "main" one. if i'm not wrong in the BPM you can raise a new request but not a linked one... so I was thinking on way to raise a linked request from an email (that i will send out from the BPM)....
i don't know if this is clear enough...
-
- Is there a way to open a new linked request in BPM?
- is there an email routing rule for creation of linked requests?
-
On 5/10/2018 at 12:27 AM, James Ainsworth said:
I think that having ticket 1 wait for tickets 2 to n to be resolved before ticket 1 is closed might be a challenge. When working with a single request, this is where the parallel processing works well. I think that there are definitely some ideas here that we can think about with how to increase some of the automation between tickets. Something like a Suspend and wait for all linked tickets to be resolved/closed.
in some initial training for hornbill i probably heard of a possibility to close a ticket and close at the same time the linked one, how can be this achieved?
-
9 hours ago, James Ainsworth said:
I think that having ticket 1 wait for tickets 2 to n to be resolved before ticket 1 is closed might be a challenge. When working with a single request, this is where the parallel processing works well. I think that there are definitely some ideas here that we can think about with how to increase some of the automation between tickets. Something like a Suspend and wait for all linked tickets to be resolved/closed.
ok I see, but if am I understending well this is something that you may evaluate to develop but not yet under development, correct?
-
22 hours ago, James Ainsworth said:
There is a BPM Operation for creating other requests from a single request. This can be used as an alternative to having one request with the task for all the teams. I think that either way can have its benefits. Having multiple requests may result in a little less visibility of progress can control which is the nice thing about using tasks within a single request. We will be adding additional requests types that can be raised automatically from the BPM which would also allow for changes or problems to also be raised.
I was aware of this opportunity but its not clear to me how to link the request in this way:
ticket 1 (main ticket for ServiceDesk Team), this might have additional tasks for the team.
ticket 2 (linked to the ticket 1 and managed by team 2)
...
ticket n (linked to the ticket 1 and managed by team n)
ticket from 2 to n will be resolved/closed by diferrent team but the main one, ticket 1, will be closed only once all the other are finished.
-
Just now, Giuseppe Iannacone said:
I'm Grouping this kind of nodes and even if collapsed i have no issue, but, once I add a 2 group something goes wrong and i loose some connection.
and while i was posting this, i discovered that switching from a stage to another the connection have appeared back again!!! WOW! so maybe is just a glitch on the visualitation
-
22 hours ago, James Ainsworth said:
The Grouping of nodes using the Group feature should not break any connections. It might be worth providing a screen shot to show the nodes that you are trying to group together. Is it the parallel processing that you want in a single Group node?
I'm Grouping this kind of nodes and even if collapsed i have no issue, but, once I add a 2 group something goes wrong and i loose some connection.
like this:
-
1. is there a way to group complex BPM like this
2. when i use group for multiple nodes and than collapse the groups, the connection mess up
3. we have diferent teams working on the same request, is there a way to manage different team with different tickets, instead of a single ticket with multiple task like the example below?
Raise New Linked Request from an email
in Service Manager
Posted
is there anyone on the otherside?!?