Paul Taylor

@AlexTumber We didn't, but I have just switched on and the progressive capture window is now displaying as expected Thanks for quick reply....we can now move into the brave new world !

Have until recently refrained from moving to the UI, but I have now moved and am unable to rollback. I may have missed some notices about this but getting an unworkable display when creating new tickets...see screenshots. This is within the latest version of Edge. Any help available before the rest of the IT organisation are forcibly moved into the new UI? Thanks in advance

@James Ainsworth - Thanks.....Will explore the 'log new' option.

Looking to see if there is a way to schedule changes and set a reoccurrence...... Usage case is to add forward schedule of change / maint windows for server patching (which is a standard change)

Bumping this thread..

I am looking to create an SLA for a very specific scenario. We have a 3rd party off shore team who provides support for our SAP environment, I am looking to create an SLA to mark their response and resolution times. The SLA is created based based on the following rules: This is because we want to manage timer only when the off shore team take owndership. The part I am unsure on is how to invoke the 'start' timers, because the ticket could get escalated to the off shore team at any stage of the lifecycle of the ticket, so what I would usually do which is to add the start response and start resolve timers early in the workflow (I assume) doesn't apply. Any direction greatly received. Paul

@James Ainsworth - We have just run through what you have outlined on one of our test business processes. Pleased to report that its worked a treat...Now gives us the opportunity to plan to extend this across all other live Service Request workflows. Big thumbs up Thanks Paul

We are exploring options for automating approvals for service requests that require Line Manager approval. We have a specific challenge we are trying to figure out Scenario: Service request - Account extension request We have designed the Progressive capture so the request can be logged by anyone (line manager, HR, Colleague). Very simple form is asking two things: 1 - Who needs their account extending. 2- For how long. For all Hornbill users, we DO have the line manager field populated. Desired result: A decision in the workflow that says: if the 'customer' equals the value of the Line Manager field for the person listed in question 1 - DO NOT SEEK Line Manager approval OR If the customer DOES NOT EQUAL the value of the Line Manager field for the person listed in question 1 - Move to a Line Manager authorisation mode. Any help steering us in the right direction would be greatly received.

Calling all customers..... Looking for anyone who is willing to have an call / session on how they have designed their service portfolio. I will detail the issue I am trying to work through and anyone working within a similar environment who have successfully cracked the nut I would like to know how. Scenario: We are looking to mature our Service Portfolio. We currently have 50 live services. We are looking to inject all assets into the Hornbill CMDB and associate assets to the relevant services Utopia would then be the service availability status would automatically change if an Incident is logged against an asset or a change is logged against an asset and we would also be able to report against overall service availability and uptime. The issue I am trying to work around is many of the services are made up of 'Production', 'DR', 'Pre prod', 'development' (we are blessed with 5 ERP systems across the whole organisation). As such, if a SAP DR server is offline for patching, that doesn't mean the SAP service availability is impacted. I am therefore at a stage where I think I either need to review the structure of the Service Portfolio so all environments have their own service or I am simply missing a trick where a service can have a sub service or structure sat underneath it / some intelligent business processing. While I am happy to receive any responses back to this thread in the absence of the Insights conference I am also happy to stick my head out of the bunker and actually speak to people who maybe have some real life relatable experience.....I think some people call that 'Networking' Thanks in advance Paul

@steve giller - Thanks for the really quick response. I have check out the wiki page.....As a quick fix I have used the 'Empty variable modifier' which is working.. The ESP conditions look good, but I think I need a quiet space and an little more time to digest that option. Thanks again :-)

Does anyone know if its possible to have the following: Scenario: Progressive capture has a number of custom fields...The intention is to provide a summary and/or authorisation email, in this instance, to a change authority with enough information about a change request that they can comfortably approve or decline without checking the ticket in Hornbill. The change authority in this exact instance is the business owner of an application so they are not a full Hornbill SM user, just a collaborative user. The issue I have is the progressive capture has fields that are optional. At the moment the email template is designed so the 'h_custom_a' h_custom_b etc etc fields are defined in the email template. The mapping works for fields that are populated with text, but any 'optional' fields that are left blank in the capture are displayed as {{h_custom_xx}} in the email as per screenshot #1 below. Ideally I would like any custom fields that are left blank in the progressive capture form to be invisible in the email template...such as in the snagit amended screenshot #2 (email template design not completed, so ignore the general look and feel of it:-) )

Looking to see if its possible to update existing Hornbill assets, but from a different source. Scenario: We currently have an SCCM import running on a schedule. This pull into Hornbill all our computer assets... we are looking to shift the source database from SCCM to Snow SAM as we believe it holds a few more useful fields than SCCM does. I would like to achieve this by disabling the SCCM import and enable the Snow with the preferred end result being the existing asset gets updated (based on asset name) rather than have duplicates created for all computer accounts Any advice greatly received

Just wondering if this ever happened or if its still on the roadmap?

Can anyone confirm if this fix was ever released. I have noticed that my organisation is affected by this same issue. Our Hornbill instance is up to date, but standard users are still seemingly seeing a lack of images on FAQs