Jump to content

David Hall

Hornbill Developer
  • Content count

    244
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

David Hall last won the day on August 24 2016

David Hall had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

6 Neutral

About David Hall

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canterbury, Kent

Recent Profile Visitors

498 profile views
  1. SLA - Escalation Actions - Increase Priority by 1

    @Martyn Houghton Yes, just had a look at that change and that makes perfect sense. I've mentioned James with regards to this post so we can make sure we have captured all of the relevant details within those two changes. Cheers, Dave.
  2. SLA - Escalation Actions - Increase Priority by 1

    Hi @Martyn Houghton Currently the increase Priority by 1 will as you suggest just update the priority value on the request record based on the order of the priorities in the priority list. We have an existing change in our backlog (CH00142342) which would look to automatically reassess/reapply the SLM rules that are configured whenever you change the priority/customer/site etc on a request which I guess is what you are looking for? I will add your interest to that change. Kind Regards, Dave.
  3. Call assignment

    Hi @derekgreen We don't currently have any rights or role restrictions around the assignment of a request, it is just a standard action that is permitted provided you have rights to view a request and update a request. Perhaps you could expand on the scenarios in which you would want to restrict access and it may be considered for a future change. Kind Regards, Dave.
  4. Restart/Resume Resolution SLA

    Hi @Martyn Houghton Apologies I missed this post, the method of using sub-status is really the only option right now as when we stop timers they are removed, so it cannot be reinstated from its previous position it would always require a new timer to be started. Regards, Dave.
  5. Breach Emails

    Hi @yelyah.nodrog The manager lookup for breach notifications is indeed looking at the data that you have in your screenshot, however it will be looking for the manager of the current owner of the request, rather than of the person who raised the request. Currently it is only possible to send the notification to the request owner, or the manager of the request owner, so if you do not wish to send the notification in this case as you suggest, then I would suggest within your targets just turning off the "Send Reminder" checkbox as per this screenshot and this will prevent notification emails from being generated. Hope that helps, Kind Regards, Dave.
  6. Working time in the request list

    Hi @JBasey, The "Last Updated" field is just a "duration since" representation of the "Last Updated Date" field which is just the point in time that the last update occurred, so there is no concept of working time here at present. Perhaps you could expand on how you wanted to use it to see if there are any alternatives or to put forward a case for a future addition. Regards, Dave.
  7. Set Resolve By Time Required

    Hi Michael, The response/fix times are based on a set duration from the point of starting the timers, determined via service level rules ( https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Service_Level_Agreement_Rules_Builder ) , therefore it's not currently possible to set a specific resolve time based on question answer content. As an alternative, the service level rules support the use of "Priority" as a test criteria, so perhaps you could create some priorities to cover the time period required e.g. 1 Day turnaround / 3 Day turnaround / 1 Week turnaround etc, use a suspend for priority node in your BPM workflow and then on manual selection of the appropriate priority (based on the time entered in the question response) you can start the timers via the BPM which will then use the rules to select a service level and timers which have been configured to run for 1 Day / 3 Days etc? Regards, Dave.
  8. Not sending SLA Reminders if SLA was met

    Hi @SJEaton, The reminder emails are only be sent if the target is still active, as long as you have marked the response or fix timers in your business process (example of response completion shown in screenshot in the node "Stop Response Timer") then the underlying timer will be stopped and no further reminder actions should be fired. Kind Regards, Dave.
  9. Customer search refresh

    Hi @chriscorcoran We came across this issue yesterday which occurs the first time that you open the customer search form from inbound emails, any subsequent attempts during your session should work correctly until you log out or do a full refresh on the browser. We have a fix in place and it will be available in the next update (build > 1066) which is in testing as I type. Regards, Dave.
  10. New Status does not clear Sub Statuses

    Sorry @Martyn Houghton , it should be builds greater 1067+ provided we have no need for any small fix updates in the near future. Regards, Dave.
  11. New Status does not clear Sub Statuses

    Hi @Martyn Houghton Sorry its taken longer than anticipated, but the next full update (2.52) which should be out in the next few weeks, I have made some changes to the Update Status BPM flowcode so that if when performing an update, if you choose not supply a sub-status in the node, it will clear the sub-status which should resolve the issue you were having with not being able to reset on resolve. Additionally I have also updated the flowcode so that sub-status will be correctly updated when moving to New/Resolved statuses etc, so you will now be able to set a specific sub-status when moving to a resolved status etc. Hopefully these updates will provide a solution to the couple of scenarios that you mentioned. Regards, Dave.
  12. BPM email node not populating template value

    Hi @carlt Thanks for the post, we've investigated the issue and it is a display issue on the BPM node settings following the addition of new parameters to the email nodes. As you have found, the underlying settings are all still intact and operating as before so there is no need to worry or change anything. A change has been made to the admin tool which will resolve this issue in the UI and make the selected parameters available again so look out for this in the next update of the admin tool. Kind Regards, Dave.
  13. Setting Sub Status from BPM giving error

    Hi @Paul Alexander I thought we previously had indicators for mandatory fields, but it turns out it was never the case. I asked the question with the developers working on the admin tool and they have added red visual indicators for mandatory fields for the next update to the admin tool, so you should have indicators shown following the next update (build > 709) which should be within the next few weeks. Regards, Dave.
  14. Setting Sub Status from BPM giving error

    Hi @Paul Alexander, Hard to be sure without seeing the configuration of the node in your BPM, but the error would suggest to me that one of the required parameters for the BPM node (requestId, onHoldPeriod, reason) has not been set. Might be worth reviewing those as a first check. Regards Dave.
  15. update version unclear

    Hi @Stuart Torres-Catmur Apologies, we have had a few issues with the update build numbers and update notes in the last few service manager updates, this will be rectified for the next update. In the meantime, should you wish you can visit https://forums.hornbill.com/forum/135-announcements/ to see the service manager update announcements which will provide you with details of the content of each of the previous updates. Kind Regards Dave.
×