Jump to content

David Hall

Hornbill Developer
  • Content Count

    304
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

David Hall last won the day on November 30

David Hall had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

17 Good

About David Hall

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Canterbury, Kent

Recent Profile Visitors

911 profile views
  1. David Hall

    Drop down views

    Hi @Blowerl Thanks for the post. Apologies for the inconvenience. We've addressed the issue and the fix is now in testing ahead of the next Service Manager update which will resolve this issue. Kind Regards, Dave.
  2. David Hall

    Email Connections Drop Down - Missing Interested/Impacted

    Morning @Martyn Houghton Thanks for the offer but I've managed to replicate the issue locally so hopefully I can debug it from here. Strangely if I see it fail and not show any connection options, opening the browser console and then trying again and it appears to work, so just trying to identify what is causing the problem as the code appears to do what it should. Will keep you updated. Kind Regards, Dave
  3. David Hall

    Email Connections Drop Down - Missing Interested/Impacted

    Hi @Martyn Houghton Thanks for the update, I'm continuing to try to replicate and diagnose, will feed back as soon I make any progress. Kind Regards, Dave
  4. David Hall

    Email Connections Drop Down - Missing Interested/Impacted

    Hi @Martyn Houghton I've been trying this locally and it did appear that I was seeing some caching issue that I could not diagnose and then it went away. Just to investigate further, if you change the connection type on any of the connections, or if you add or remove a connection, does this have any impact on the options shown to you in the email action? Regards, Dave.
  5. Hi @JO_7001, To remove the checkpoints altogether you will need to click the pencil icon and then delete the relevant stage checkpoints from the list as shown in the screenshot. Hope that helps, Kind Regards, Dave.
  6. Hi @Joshua T M Thanks for the post, to invoke that API call you will need to supply getRequestHistoricUpdates for the queryName parameter and this should enable it to complete successfully. This should have been made clear in the parameter description so I'll see about getting that added in now for future reference. Kind Regards, Dave.
  7. David Hall

    Incident Process error

    Hi @Ann-MarieJones Thanks for the post. It looks like you are not currently using the latest service manager update, as standard I would advise updating to the latest version and seeing whether that corrects your issue or not. There have been changes made to this suspendOwner operation in the latest update so if you could update and then let us know if you still receive errors we can investigate further from there. Kind Regards, Dave.
  8. Hi @samwoo Yes that's correct, provided the request is logged from within the main app (i.e. not via email or the portals) and you are not a member of the team the request is being assigned to then you will be added as a member which will let them view a request as if they were part of the team. Regards, Dave.
  9. David Hall

    Showing pages despite of able to see a full list of users

    Hi @Aaron Summers Just to follow up on this, we've identified the issue and we'll have a fix included for our next update. Regards, Dave.
  10. David Hall

    Showing pages despite of able to see a full list of users

    Hi @Aaron Summers Thanks for the post, it does indeed look like something a bit odd is going on with the paging in this view, I'll get a problem raised and we'll investigate further. Kind Regards, Dave.
  11. David Hall

    Resolve by dates not calculating as expected

    Hi Geoff, Yes as long as it is after your "Wait for Incident Priority" node then it should match the rules correctly. Regards, Dave
  12. David Hall

    Resolve by dates not calculating as expected

    Hi Geoff, Sorry about the back and forth, can I confirm if in this case you are making selecting a priority mandatory as part of logging the request or are you manually setting the priority within the request details after it has been logged? From the screenshots you have provided the service level configuration looks correct, but it would appear that the "Start Resolution Timer" BPM node is being called before the priority is set on the request, if this is the case then I would check that I have a "Suspend -> Wait for Request Priority" node in my BPM process before the "Start Resolution Timer" node. This new node would ensure that the BPM waits until you have selected a priority, details can be found here https://wiki.hornbill.com/index.php/Service_Manager_Business_Process_Workflow under the "Suspend" header where there is an entry for "Wait for Request Priority" Regards, Dave
  13. David Hall

    Resolve by dates not calculating as expected

    Hi Geoff, Would you be able to show me one of the rules you have created that is failing just so I have an idea of what you have configured? Many thanks, Dave.
  14. David Hall

    Resolve by dates not calculating as expected

    Hi Geoff, So just to confirm, before the above BPM node is hit, you have already set a priority e.g. by selection during your logging process or by using the "Suspend Wait for Priority" BPM node? Maybe worth just showing me the details from one of those rules that is not being met as well. Dave
  15. David Hall

    Resolve by dates not calculating as expected

    Hi Geoff, So the only way you should end up with the "Initial Service Level" is if none of the previous rules are matched. So at the point of the BPM where you have used the "Start Resolve Timer" task, is the priority value you are checking correctly set to match one of the rules? Just as a confirmation, currently this check is only done when that node is called to start the timers, if you subsequently change the priority etc it will not currently alter the chosen SL, this is coming out in our next update. Regards, Dave.
×