Steve Giller

Yes, with the caveat that you need to be in a view that has the Serial Number displayed.

It's possible that you need to specify the Catalog Item on the Routing Rule Template - without having sight of your Service Portfolio I can't be sure.

The solution provided by @Bob Dickinson is still the advised method.

This suggests to me that the Routing Rules are working fine, it's the raising of the Requests that is failing. Once you have taken the troubleshooting steps provided by Victor, if these do not resolve the problem I would check the Routing Rule Template and the Service/CI that it invokes.

Development have clarified that it's not security that prevents the update content being presented, but practical considerations as the content could (in theory) be unlimited. The aim of the webhook is to provide enough information to use additional methods (e.g. the Web Services API) to connect to Hornbill and collect any additional information that is required.

I'm afraid the short answer here is no. Can I ask what you're aiming to achieve here, as there may be a better way of doing this. The Workflows are designed to be created and maintained via the UI, what value does downloading them en masse bring for you?

Out of interest, @samwoo, are the new FAQ's still missing, or have they appeared?

I've moved this to the Reporting section - I'm not sure that the ITOM team would be over-excited about replying.

This is tagged as an enhancement but it's rather vague. Where are you expecting this to be shown? Exposing a logon ID could be considered a security risk, so I would expect our Developers would need a very precise and compelling business case to consider this.

Depending on your version of Jira there should be a Hornbill iBridge integration for this.

How are you generating the Feedback Requests? Assuming you're exclusively using the Hornbill star rating for the feedback are you, for example, actively emailing every customer when a Request is closed? Or leaving them to check the Closed Requests and provide feedback via the Portal? Is it somewhere in the middle with some services set to accept feedback and not others?

Always step 1.

What was the limit when those were created? How were the existing Profiles entered onto the system? Have you tried increasing the Maximum Levels?

There are a few ways to do this, the simplest is probably to add a Decision Node after Get Line Manager Email Address and have a branch for &[global["flowcoderefs"]["resultRef"]["email"]] is not set which will test for an empty email - this goes to the the IT Manager Authorisation, and a No Match Which goes to the Line Manager Authorisation. Note: This simple version relies on the Line Manager's email being either correct or empty. Also, in the Get Line Manager Email Address node it would be worth ensuring that the Result Reference is unique to ensure that variable isn't incorrectly populated elsewhere in the workflow.

Once you have the Line Manager Email Address, test this is valid. If it is, branch to the External Authorisation Node as normal. If not, branch to a separate External Authorisation Node which is set to mail the IT Manager. The Authorise/Reject/Expired branches can converge to the same actions or take their own paths as appropriate.

Could you clarify which attributes you're referring to? I would suspect that the former would simply be accountExpires, but I'm not aware of a Begin Date field in AD. It's been a while since I've used it, though.

What's the current configuration?

That's what the red sidebar means - as far as I'm aware the only mandatory field that can be set to Auto is Request Reference.

I would personally doubt it - not all attachments are printable, or they can be tiny email signature graphics up to A0 posters (or larger, if someone clicks the wrong thing) so I cannot see this being practical. It's may be possible (Note: that is a long way from it might happen) but someone would need to give our Developers a fairly precise brief on what is required for it to be reviewed.

Without knowing the whole process it would be difficult to get into the specifics. It might be one for Expert Services, depending on how much detail you are able/want to expose on a public forum.

The Import can use a wide variety of sources - from a csv to a complex database like SCCM. If you have bulk update options in SCCM you could make the changes there and have them synch into Hornbill, or you could simply put all of the assets in a spreadsheet and set up a one-off import using that data.

As above - how would you expect the Template to behave when you use Request Assets[10].* in the Template but only have 1 asset linked?

I've tagged this as an Enhancement for you.

As far as I'm aware, the webhook is to indicate an update has been made, not to push the update itself outside of the platform, which would be a potential security risk.

I'm not saying getting what you want is impossible, but what you are asking for isn't something we (Hornbill) can control. What is the PDF Download you're referring to? Is this the Print function being used to create a PDF, or a report on the Request creating a PDF, or something else?