Jump to content

P. Nordqvist

Hornbill Users
  • Posts

    71
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by P. Nordqvist

  1. @Victor This is what I though as well.

    Now I have assigned a task (related to a service request) to a user having the Collaboration Role and this is the error message when I try to open the task as this user.
    image.thumb.png.2fe8555a42b2a2b46e71fc0c972e3eeb.png

    The user is NOT a basic user, it is configured as a User.
    It seems I have to provide some Service Manager roles as well to be able to work on this task.
    Other roles assigned to this user is as well:

    image.png.27895ccbaa014b6b8095f5a383fb5e9d.png

    Kind Regards
    Per

  2. Hi,

    I am looking for a way to give some users a role that enables them to ONLY work on tasks (activities).
    The tasks has been created by an analyst within service manager application related to a Service Request.
    Now I would like to configure a role to a user that can only complete the task. Nothing else. The user shall NOT be able to use the Service Manager application. A pure Collaboration user.
    The user shall NOT be able to view any requests within Hornbill (except his own requests via the service portal).

    Any idea how I can achieve this?

  3. Hi,

    When our routing rules logs a call, the assigned group gets a notification mail sent and the subject is not complete and includes strange characters.
    Is this a know issue?

    This an example how the email subject looks:
    Incident - TMG Profile login 3c970ed84904 has been assigned to your g =?utf-8?B?cm91c?=

    And this is how the email template looks like:
    {{.H_requesttype}} - {{.H_summary|empty}} has been assigned to your group

    Any help would be apprechiated
    Per

  4. Hi,

    I know this is an experimental settings but I would like to highlight an issue with it.
    Currently we have set app.experimental.multipleRequestsAction to ON.
    At the same time we have set app.request.allowResolveCloseWithoutAnalyst to OFF.

    This would mean it should NOT be possible to resolve requests without having an owner.
    If you use the multi select feature to resolve calls you can do it even if the requests does NOT have any analyst assigned.

    Additional to this issue I have an additional request with an assign action to the multi select feature so you also have the possibility to assign multi select requests.

    Kind Regards
    Per

  5. Hi,

    I would like to have the possibility to configure what statuses are shown in the default request list and what is included in the "Total:" selection.
    Currently you get a list view that by default shows all "New", "Open", "On-Hold" and "Resolved" calls.

    image.png.667c99a51c6b1c1dcefa155b3a5c55a2.png

    What my Analysts don't like at all is that there is no possibility to just view the "Active" calls, which in our case would be the "New" and "Open".
    The resolved calls are to 99% history and the "On-Hold" calls are not interesting at the moment.
    What they want is simply to see all calls they should work on at the moment.

    Here it would be nice to have an additional selection named "active" or something similar for "New" and "Open".

    I know you can create your own views, but as soon as you select any other filter, your own view is not the active one any more.

    Kind Regards
    Per

  6. @Victor, I think I know what happened. So I believe everything works as it should.

    I had the setting app.request.allowResolveCloseWithoutAnalyst set to ON which is the default.
    What happened then is that an analyst resolved a call without having any analyst assigned. Before the call was resolved it had the status "New" without any sub-status.
    When it was resolved the sub-status stayed empty (I set the sub-status in the BP when the call gets assigned to an analyst).
    In this case the email update changed the sub-status to In progress which I guess caused the call to be reopened.

    Do you believe I am right in my thoughts?

    Kind Regards

    Per

  7. @Victor, yes. You are right. We have it configured like this.
    image.png.a4c6f91ff54edf02cd11f82f78d17978.png

    I though this will only happen if the call has the status "On-Hold" and the customer updates the call.
    What would be your propose how we shall change the settings to achieve what we want?
    I guess the best would be to clear the "On Customer Response..." value to nothing.

    In this case the Analyst will have to change the status from On-Hold to Open manually when the customer updates an On-Hold call, right?

    Kind Regards

    Per

  8. Hi @Dan Munns,

    Thanks for your reply. These both settings you're mentioning are set to "Off" and they don't help us at all as the use case we have is when the requests having the status Resolved.

    What I don't understand is why an email update do also change the status of the call. The email update should JUST update the call, nothing else.
    In the workflow we have a step after the call has been resolved to wait for a status change, and for some reason this update that happens also updates the status and reopens the call. How can we change this behavior?

  9. Hi,

    We currently have a routing rule that updates a request if the request number is in the email.
    Now we have the issue stated in this thread [https://community.hornbill.com/topic/12292-automatic-reopen-ticket-based-on-an-email/] What happens is that the routing rule updates the call and reopens the call.
    This is NOT what we want. In this case we simply want the email to update the call but NOT change the status.
    For this the user have an option in the service portal by clicking "It's still not working" button.

    How can we avoid that an email update changes the status to open?

     

    Kind Regards
    Per

×
×
  • Create New...