Lauren

Hi @David Hall As requested: 1. The Service Level was updated on SR00070018, but not IN00069963. 2. Both requests had been placed on hold until a specific time - one later that day on 25th, the other 26th 3. There are two business processes here - one for service requests and one for incidents. In one, the response time had already been marked (SR00070018). The response time for IN00069963 had not yet been marked. Thanks Lauren

Hi @David Hall Thanks for coming back to me - I've since been made aware of another occurrence of this: IN00069963 - first occurred approx. 10:30 on 25/02 SR00070018 - first occurred approx. 12:20 on 25/02 The error appears whenever you try and take the requests off hold. Thanks Lauren

Thanks @James Ainsworth

Hi One of our analysts has received the following error when trying to take a request off hold: "FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_ops/smUpdateStatus): nodeName: API Call - systemSmUpdateStatus; nodeId: 15ccd0bd-6cc4-4151-94f1-95008f16b270; At 310/1: "Uncaught EspMethodCall::invoke: Operation[apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests::systemSmUpdateStatus] FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_ops/systemSmUpdateStatus): nodeName: Invoke Flowcode: Take Request Off Hold; nodeId: 423f928a-1112-48b2-be44-4d9525ea4edb; At 368/1: "Uncaught EspMethodCall::invoke: Operation[apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests::takeRequestOffHold] FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_ops/takeRequestOffHold): nodeName: Invoke FC: Take fix timer off hold; nodeId: b2982779-bde4-4c7b-a388-0d8e5104fd6b; At 564/1: "Uncaught EspMethodCall::invoke: Operation[apps/com.hornbill.servicemanager/Requests::takeFixTimerOffHold] FlowCode Exception (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_ops/takeFixTimerOffHold): Schema validation: Mandatory (com.hornbill.servicemanager/entities/Requests/fc_ops/takeFixTimerOffHold/adjustedTime)" throw(e); _fc_node_exec_b2982779_bde4_4c7b_a388_0d8e5104fd6b" throw(e); _fc_node_exec_423f928a_1112_48b2_be44_4d9525ea4edb" throw(e); _fc_node_exec_15ccd0bd_6cc4_4151_94f1_95008f16b270" Any thoughts? I cannot replicate this at all, so am a little unsure how to resolve this. Thanks Lauren

Hi @James Ainsworth Thanks for getting back to me. To answer your points above: Bob, the creator of the views, is still able to see the views in their list of Views Bob is sharing them with both users and teams. It varies per view, however we've checked and it is affecting views that have been shared with just users as well as just teams. We've tried refreshing as well as closing and reopening our browsers following restarts. This hasn't made a difference. This morning I tried sharing one of my views (that wasn't previously shared) with a colleague. He wasn't able to see a "Shared Views" option in his list of Views after a refresh. Thanks Lauren

Since we've updated to Build 1439 (released today), our shared views are no longer listed under the "Views" drop down in the request list. Is this a known fault at all? How do we go about getting these back? Thanks Lauren

Hi @James Ainsworth Thanks for getting back to me. Yes, we're using Network Device as the asset class. The fields we'd like are: Manufacturer, Model, Serial Number, Physical CPUs, Weight, Physical Cores, Power Supply Count and Watts. Thanks Lauren

We're looking at editing some of our asset types but have found that the "Additional Properties" sections differ per asset types. As an example, for "Server" asset type you have "Computer Information", "Hardware Information", "Operating System Information" and "Network Information". For "Switch" asset type you only have "Network Information" within "Additional Properties". We ideally need the "Hardware Information" to be available for "Switch" asset type. How can I achieve this? Thanks Lauren

Hi @TrevorHarris Thanks for your reply - we've definitely updated to the latest version so it must be the cached icons. Lauren

Hi I've noticed that some users who are listed as having access to a particular board don't have an icon displaying their initial: Having checked this, it seems this is the case on numerous boards but for different users. As an example, "Brian" above displays on one board with an icon saying "B", but others without. He has the same permission of just "View" to both boards. This is the same on the permissions list, as well as the icons on each card on the boards. Interestingly enough, one of my colleagues (who has the exact same roles in Board Manager, as well as the same permissions to the boards I have) sees the "B" on the board above where I don't. I know this doesn't affect their access, and seems to be just an aesthetic issue - are you able to confirm why? Thanks Lauren

Hi We've received some feedback from our analysts that the "Resolve Linked Requests" drop-down on the "Resolve" tab isn't obvious enough, and I can't help but agree. We've unfortunately seen several critical incidents be resolved by analysts then child incidents remain open for some time, causing a breach. Obviously some of this can be avoided with training. When resolving a critical or high priority incident, it is likely that child incidents will be associated and therefore need resolving at the same time as the parent incident. Similar to the "Reopen" and "Edit" button, could an additional button be added that says "Resolve Linked Requests" (preferably next to "Close")? The reason we cannot use the "Resolve Linked Requests" node in the business process, is because often a parent incident will have a problem, known error or change request associated which we do not want resolving at the same time as the incident. Thanks Lauren

Hi One of our test contracts listed in Supplier Manager is set to expire on 28th Feb 2019 and we've received the warning "This contract is due to expire within the next 30 days!" in Supplier Manager. However, I can't see a way to renew the contract. Is this something that is currently in planning, or am I missing the option? Thanks Lauren

Hi @TrevorHarris Thanks for clearing that up - makes sense

Hi I've given a few of our administrators the new(ish) "Board Super User" role in administration. This doesn't allow us to view all boards though - am I incorrect in thinking that this is meant to give access to all boards, despite not being listed as having access to some boards? Thanks Lauren

Thanks @AlexTumber Appreciate the quick turnaround

Sorry @AlexTumber - we've run into a couple of other issues surrounding project resources: 1) Deleting a stakeholder doesn't remove a resource - is this expected behaviour, given resources are added automatically when stakeholders are added? 2) Adding multiple stakeholders at once doesn't add multiple resources - as an example, I tried to add two stakeholders to a project. It added the two stakeholders fine, but only added the first stakeholder as a resource. Thanks Lauren

+1 - this is the same for problem records. A user may log into two devices and therefore experience the same issue on two devices, therefore has been affected twice.

Thanks @AlexTumber I've just tried adding a stakeholder and the number of available resources has increased Lauren

Hi @AlexTumber No, we're trying to add resources to the "Resources" tab. We've added the required users as Stakeholders, but need them as resources to carry out certain functions within project tasks. Lauren

Hi @Victor We had only resorted to using the email address as the portal wasn't working (as above). Thanks for letting us know about the premier success plan - we hadn't been notified that this was the case. Thanks Lauren

Hi We're trying to add a project resource to one of our projects. When clicking the button "Add a New Resource", nothing happens. Both the user listed as the "Project Manager" and I (we both have the highest permissions within Project Manager) are experiencing this. We've previously been able to add resources. Thanks Lauren

Hi @Paul Alexander @AlexTumber We're getting the same error

Hi I'm unable to log any faults via the portal - the options available to me are limited and I only have option to access the forum or wiki (see below). When I attempted to email support@hornbill.com I received an undeliverable email, similar to the one received the other day when hornbill were experiencing email issues. Thanks Lauren

Thanks @Steven Boardman

Hi @Victor I think this could be the same thing we've reported (via the portal) ? Lauren