Jump to content

David Hall

Hornbill Developer
  • Posts

    558
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19

Posts posted by David Hall

  1. Hi @Ann

    Thanks for the post.  I've just been trying this out and it appears I'm seeing the same issue with the time addition on the resolution tab, we'll do some more investigation to see if we can find out what the problem it.

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

  2. Hi Helen,

    Just checking if you mean a link in the format such as this example?

    https://service.hornbill.com/testinstance/servicemanager/log/123/incident/456/

    There is no reason I know of why the links would operate differently from an email or a Word document, I've tried the above format link and from email and Word it will take me to the log form of the catalog item.

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

  3. Hi @Sandip Bhogal

    Thanks for posting.  The SLA configuration in your screenshots looks to be ok... when you are creating the new ticket for HR.. where are you seeing I1, I2, I3, I4, I5, P1, P2, P3, P4 etc is this the priority selection form as defined by the list here?

    image.png

     

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

  4. @HHH

    Sorry for the delay in responding we seem to have missed this due to the moving between forums.

    To confirm in your scenario originally posted, once Anna has been moved to Organization B within Hornbill....

    • Anna - Will no longer see the request in the portal as the request is tied to Organization A (despite still being the customer associated)
    • Andrew - Will still be able to see the request via the "Organizations View" being granted
    • Bob and Betty - Will have no visibility of the request as it is tied to Organization A, only those raised from this point for Organization B will be visible.

    Hope that clarifies the situation.

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

    • Thanks 1
  5. @Paul Alexander thanks for posting up.

    I've just been checking this out and you are using it correctly, however I am seeing a similar issue to you where it does not appear to be correctly applying the filtering for the "before x days" option.  I'll raise a problem to investigate this further, in the meantime the "before" filtering option with a specific date is filtering as I would expect so I'm not sure if you're able to achieve what you need to with that as a temporary workaround?

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

    • Thanks 1
  6. Hi @JAquino

    Thanks for the post and sorry for the inconvenience.  It looks like a change for the recent integration with Hornbill Supplier Manager may be the reason behind this but we'll need to investigate further.  We have a defect raised for this issue which we'll look at as soon as possible and I've added you as an affected connection.  

    Kind Regards,

    Dave

     

  7. Hi @Adrian Simpkins

    All of the SLA notification functionality was implemented before we had any concept of the analyst availability options etc so currently all notifications will be sent to all relevant team members/defined recipients regardless of being marked on holiday or not.  

    I'll raise this internally for this to be considered when we next make changes in this area.

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

    • Like 1
  8. Hi @Adrian Simpkins

    I would have expected the node to correctly mark the response and end the timers, but with the change over and the SLA change then its possible that this is causing a scenario with an issue that I have not seen before.  If this persists with requests logged after the change over then by all means come back and we can take a further look.

    Regards,

    Dave

    • Like 1
  9. Hi @Adrian Simpkins

    It all depends on your BPM process being used for the request and where within that process the Timer -> Mark Response Time node is placed, we do not automatically mark it on any one specific action as every customer will make their own business decision as to what point in the process it should be marked so you should use the node in your BPM at the appropriate stage.

    The change of SLA will update the targets, but if the target has already been marked then it will not generate any new timers/events for that request.

    Does that help to answer your question?

    Regards,

    Dave

    • Like 1
  10. @Adrian Simpkins

    Ah ok...  so it simply looks like the response timer has never been marked... therefore the timer and escalations will remain active until you reach the relevant stage of your BPM process where you call the BPM Node Timer -> Mark Response Time  . In this scenario the change of status to resolved or closed will not automatically mark the response timer.

    Regards,

    Dave.

  11. Hi @Adrian Simpkins

    Thanks for the post and the timeline of events, could you confirm when the response target itself was marked?  Just trying to confirm if these escalations that are incorrectly firing are as a result of the SLA change, so it would be useful to know when the response was marked and whether the request was on-hold or not at the time of the SLA change.

    Kind Regards,

    Dave.

    • Like 1
  12. @Darren Rose @Paul Alexander Thanks for the posts.

    I've had a look and it looks like we unfortunately have some translation strings missing here.  We'll get this corrected in the next build of Service Manager.

    Following the next Service Manager build update you will be able to alter the content of these strings as needed:

    * user.view.serviceform.requests   (Request Link Text)

    * user.view.serviceform.documents   (Documents Link Text)

    Kind Regards,

    Dave

    • Like 1
  13. Hi @carlt

    I've tested this and it looks to be working as expected.  Just to confirm, the list will only return results when you have entered 2 or more characters of the name into the search field and it will only return customers that are subscribed to the service that you have associated to the request, so I'm not sure if either of those explain the lack of results for you?

    Cheers,

    Dave.

×
×
  • Create New...