Berto2002

Ah, actually, on the ICFs in basic user view, the mandated field is teal until clicked and then goes red.

You can see the little bar on the left should be red for mandated fields but it's started showing as grey in the UI. Does not even go red when highlighting or when populated:

And, as per my previous request of this type, the ability to have all updates to Customers go through teams also; at the moment, the only notification option for updates of visibility Customer is via email.

Have asked for Premier Support on this one.

I was trying to search emails this morning. My default sort order on the folder concerned, pre-search, is newest first: I enter "Approved" as a search term because I wanted to see all the emails **recently** that have that string: The sort order has reversed and I have no option to change it because the sort order options are absent. I have 316 results and 20 results per page so I need to scroll to the bottom and press next 16 times to get to the newest entries for that search; which is pretty bonkers. So I request that sort-order be please added to the results of the search (i.e. as it was before searching) and that the sort order of search results observe the sort order present at the point of the search. Additional information: the sort order is UNKNOWN on searches so anyone looking in date order will be unable to find things on searches.

@Fizza thought you were going to report this Yes, pretty sure this is a bug. We get no result for logonID from the Get Customer Details node. For some time (maybe years... since I learned this on implementaton) we have used primary email address. Can that be right we've just ignored such a thing?! My profile has logon ID (never really clocked the profile doesn't have CustomerID but uses UserID...): Config of node to push Get node outcomes to Timeline: Timeline output showing blank logon ID: Would also ask for comment from HB about these discrepancies: - Get node is missing an output of User ID and Employee ID, both of which are on the main user profile record - What is relationship between User ID and Logon ID officially? - Why are the user's profile details form (where they can add a secondary email address and other fields) and the admin User Profile view not aligned in terms of fields included?

+1 for convenience but we don't alter it often

The Azure Import Utility can sync-in users' line managers from AAD so they are then stored in your instance against the users' profile. The Get Customer Details node then gets Manager Name and Manager ID of the person who is the Request Customer. In our instance the Manager ID is the email address; else use that Manager ID to do a second Get Customer lookup to obtain the manager's email address (&[global["flowcoderefs"]["getCustomerInformation"]["primaryEmailAddress"]]). So thinking you don't need to go into AAD for this.

We have this too. Looking out for the fix

I tried another test with the authentication user and it still gave the same error:

Keeping this at the top

@Joshua Howitt The 'User ID' that we use to Authenticate the connection between Hornbill and Microsoft Office is our ServiceDeskID (the admin user in Hornbill). The UserID I used in my test (that worked on 6th March) was that of our infrastructure manager who has altered their Outlook permissions to allow the ServiceDeskID (the one we use as KeySafe/API/Admins) to Edit their calendar. I used this variable: &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customerPrimaryEmail"]]. So the ID was neither mine (SessionID) not the ServiceDeskID. I then altered my requirement to add the calendar entry to the calendar of the Owner of the Change Request, not the Customer so I used this variable: &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["ownerId"]]. This is where I got the error, despite the actual ID that pulls back being the same person as I used above. Again, the ID was neither mine (SessionID) not the ServiceDeskID. Are you telling me that the UserID has to be the ServiceDeskID? But if so, that was not the case on 6th March so has this changed (there was a Service Manager release between the two tests I did)? It is also not in the guidance for that field which states "User ID that entry will be assigned to". We were able to use the UserID for my infrastructure manager on 6th March.

Hi Hornbill?

Fixed for us as far as I know but I will ask service desk again; now I'm doubting too!

Bump and hoping the guys have been away and now returned to look at this

My second screenshot was just the names of my rules showing the order I have them in. The "delete automatic emails..." one is the one with there expressions: subject LIKE 'Automatic reply%' OR subject LIKE '%Automatic reply%' OR subject LIKE 'Out of office%' OR subject LIKE '%out of office%' OR subject LIKE '%Out of office%' OR subject LIKE 'out of office%'

@Steve G or @Joshua Howitt just hit a new error when trying to release a previously tested function in this area; to add to outlook calendar. I have given the permissions on my calendar to the userID and I am the Owner which is the ID used to add to. Here is the error message returned for this workflow: iBridge Method: /Microsoft/Office 365/Calendar/Create Calendar Event.m Error: The specified credential identifier could not be found This looks a bit like the system cannot find it's permissions to do this work? Node config: In UserID I am using Owner (their calendar) &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["ownerId"]] In the Attendees, I am using these fields which are populated with the names and logonID (UPN) of the relevant parties. Implementer (required) &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customFieldN"]] &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customField37"]] Customer (optional) &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customer"]] &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customerPrimaryEmail"]] Peer (optional) &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customFieldO"]] &[global["flowcoderefs"]["getReqInformationEndStage"]["customField35"]]

@Steve G are you about?

You’ve got Announcements pinned from 2021 and 2022 which take up and obscure the latest announcements. Can you ask someone to tidy/remove the ones not relevant please? I think some of these are no longer required and from the back-end you guys may just not see what is pinned. Maybe other forums also have old pins like this; some are, again, not relevant. May be worth going through all? Thanks

+1 please. We need the actual time. This is a frustrating UI feature and impedes diagnosis of issues.

I have many workflows with Get datetime-type utilities. Which of these is going from Cloud Utils? After this happens, will our nodes change in the workflows or is there a necessary migration path and deadline? Perhaps I am suggesting that each of the releases should start to have a link to the updated documentation so we can read the detail.

@Fizza FYA

Any update on this please? @Ben Maddams still an issue for you?

Lee, have an inbound routing rule on your connected mailbox to find and discard out of office responses. Set that rule to execute before the rule that matches responses to the tickets. That way, no such updates will come through. Sometimes it's a bit of trick to get the exact terms matched but we use this with some success: subject LIKE 'Automatic reply%' OR subject LIKE '%Automatic reply%' OR subject LIKE 'Out of office%' OR subject LIKE '%out of office%' OR subject LIKE '%Out of office%' OR subject LIKE 'out of office%' It's not quite what you asked for but it achieves the same outcome of not coming off hold. The disadvantage of this approach is that the service desk don't get to see when someone is out of office (unless you have other mechanisms for them to find out like Teams Presence checks etc). If your hold is on a workflow suspend node awaiting customer response I can imagine something like this but haven't tried it: After receiving a customer response the suspend node moves to a node which gets the latest email content You have a decision node and expression that checks for the "out of office" kind of wording in the subject of that email If that's found, you send it back to the same suspend node to await (the next) customer response, if not, move on to the next node This doesn't help you if the on-hold is manual/ad-hoc as there's no workflow to react.

@Adrian Simpkins may I cordially suggest you raise Premier Support ticket if you've not already as this kind of issue has gone on a long time and maybe needs more attention?