Steve Giller

Are you using the % wildcard in your "is like" clause? i.e. "Begins With%" "%Ends With" "%Contains%"

Is there any reason you cannot simply make the "someone" a Member or Connection on the Request? This would grant access to the Timeline and they would see the current state, not the snapshot at the time the email was created.

I'm afraid not - these are Human Tasks, and therefore must be completed by a Human.

I suspect that this is your issue, then - this should be the request that is suspended, not the request that you are waiting for.

Wait for Linked Request does not wait for a Linked Request to be completed, it waits until the current Request has another Request linked to it. Are you using this node, or the Wait for Linked Requests Completion node?

Select the User(s) you wish to delete then click on the Delete button:

You can simulate Authorisations in Service Manager by: Creating an email to the Authoriser. Creating a Human Task with Authorise and Reject (etc. if necessary) Outcomes. When the response from the Authoriser arrives, the Task Assignee completes the Task with the relevant Outcome. Optionally having an expiry on the Task to allow for a Chase mechanism There is also the External Authorisation option, which does not require a license. You can also simply send an email from the Business Process saying "Do this in Frevvo" (obviously you'd word it better!) and autoclose the Request. There is no option to do this in a Capture, though.

Only the Operator needs a value here - if the field were mandatory it would be marked in red, but it would also not be possible to set it to Ignore. I suspect that the issue is that Set was used and the field presented "nothing" (an empty string) as a value - this is passed to a Timestamp which requires a number, and is correctly parsed as undefined.

If we're creating a Co-Worker then the Archived User can be found in the Admin Tool under the Platform Configuration section and the Users option. This defaults to Active Users, so you will need to change the dropdown.

Caveat: Please have this advice checked, because querying SQL isn't really my area, but I would guess that adding a date criteria to the query would achieve this. As the goHornbillDataExport tool uses a Report, and Reporting has dynamic variables a daily schedule to add updates BETWEEN {{DATE:startofyesterday}} AND {{DATE:endofyesterday}} Should add the previous day's data to the existing table in your warehouse, for example.

I've tagged this as an Enhancement for you. Please note that this does not mean it will be accepted, but it does ensure that Development will view and assess the requirement.

There's no card for this under Hornbill Solution Center -> Subscription -> Roadmap Library, and no further posts on this thread, so it would appear there are no updates to share at present.

This would be part of the KeySafe Key you set up, see the Instance Config section of the documentation.

If you have a Suspend-> Wait for Owner node in the BPM followed by a Cloud Automation -> Utilities -> Get Timestamp node you could push the result into a Custom Field (Date type) and use that in your report.

It is on the left as well, you should find it immediately below the Request Reference (slightly higher than the part of the screen on your snip.)

Hi @Tina.Lapere We've identified that this was being restricted. The restriction will be removed in an upcoming update.

The Asset Management Admin is the Role which was intended to have the rights to view the audit trail - this was previously not being enforced, which was incorrectly allowing the Asset Management User Role to also view the trail. This has been corrected, however we have reviewed this internally and the Asset Management User Role will also have this right from the next Service Manager update. In the meantime granting the Asset Management Admin Role will allow Users to view the Audit Trail.

We have reproduced this behaviour internally and are looking into it. We will post back here when we have an update.

The only way you can do this is to have a normal email distribution list (e.g. in Exchange/O365 Mail) and use the email for that.

That's correct, these are not editable. However, neither are they Customer-facing, and the actions you take once one is selected is defined by the Workflow, so there should be no effect on your process regardless of its value.

The Service Manager (old) Boards option will not display if you turn on the app.itsm.boards.disableServiceManagerBoards setting. I've not seen this popup without the Assignbutton so I'm not sure if this is based on a setting or the status of the requests you're selecting, e.g. one or more of the selected requests does not allow assignment.

The short answer is "No." I'm not aware of any planned changes in this area, however the UI is included under the umbrella of Continuous Improvement and we can ensure this is an area that is considered.

The documentation for the Manager assignment on the wiki gives more detail on how to configure the various options. Although the given regex will work for the majority of situations, you may need to adjust it to match the configuration of your LDAP source data. You may or may not need the "Reverse" option on, again based on your LDAP source. Depending on the manager's distinguished name attribute you may wish to use the "Search for Manager Id" option and/or the "Match Against DN" If you can adjust these settings based on your underlying data source (and maybe a little testing - we'd recommend doing this on a small group of accounts or even better an individual) you should get the combination suitable for your import. The -dryrun=true commandline parameter, when specified, will ensure no information will be written to Hornbill and it allows you to confirm that the configuration is correct during testing. If you have further questions after reviewing the settings alongside the documentation please post back.

This was an issue in December but was resolved in Service Manager build 2784 Assigning a Request does not happen automatically - this would be configured within your Business Process.

The suggestion there would be to use 15 of the available mapped fields to store the values you want to use for the email, and use the IC variable values within the Workflow for the rest. There is even the option, if you're using Custom Fields for reporting, to re-map the fields on once the Request is closed (and will therefore not send any further emails) thus freeing up the Custom Fields used in the Templates.