[rt-users] questions before i install

[Jesse]

On Mon, Aug 07, 2000 at 03:57:39PM -0700, Mark D. Anderson wrote:
> i'm about to install rt; before i dive in, some questions:
> 
> 1. the downloaded rt.tar.gz is version 1.0.3; i see commit message regarding 1.3.12, and i see discussion of 2.0
> I assume that "2.0" is what 1.3.x will become?
>

You got it.
 
> 2. i assme that when 2.0 comes out, there will be upgrade scripts from the database in version1.0.3.

Also Correct.


> but if i install the 1.3.x from cvs (not to mention the twort from sourceforge), i presume there might
> *not* be scripts to automatically upgrade my database to be compatible with the final 2.0 version?

You're on a roll.

> so if i do put a 1.3.x snapshot into production, i might be setting myself up for writing some custom sql
> later on?
> 

Yep. and 1.3.x really isn't feature complete yet. It's guaranteed to be 
both buggy and insecure.

> 3. there is little information on the sourceforge site about twort. judging from the cvs dates,
> there have been checkins there, but there is no information i can find indicating how it compares
> to the fsck cvs archive. Also, neither twort nor fsck seems to have a cvs snapshot available;

The 1.3.x releases of RT are essentially minimally tested CVS snapshots.  Automated snapshots would be no more stable than checking out the current rt-1-1 branch from CVS.

> i don't feel like playing "do i feel lucky" and downloading whatever the latest cvs happens to be,
> even if i did want to try 1.3.x instead of 1.0.3.
> 

*nod* Completely fair.  1.3 is still for people who want to hack code.

> 4. i'm kind of mystified by the various rt email aliases, even after reading the README, fax, and user guide.
> There is the "rt mail alias", which would typically be "rt".
> Then there is the "default" or "primary" queue, which i guess would be something like "rt-general",
> and others for each other queue ("rt-helpdesk", "rt-office", etc.).
> Then there are optional email aliases for actions, which i guess have to be per-queue, something
> like "rt-general-action", etc. -- if i choose to continue the convention of starting each with "rt-".
> But when does email originate from the "rt mail alias" (typically "rt"), rather than from a queue?

Errors come from RT's mail alias. Queues which don't yet have an email address
assigned to them send their mail from rt's mail alias.

> When would users send email directly to "rt" rather than to "rt-$queuename"?

Once a ticket is created, it really doesn't matter what alias things get sent to.
RT just does the right thing.  rt@ is nice and convenient for people who know
what they're doing, though.

> Why does there even have to be a user named "rt"? (assuming i have some other user to
> run my httpd and to login to mysql).

RT's scripts run setuid to the RT user.  That user alone has permission to know
what rt's mysql database password is and to read and write content files
from disk.

> 
> 5. i also couldn't find a clear explanation of "correspond" vs. "comment".

Comments don't get sent to the end-user. correspondence does.

> 6. is there any revised ETA for a 2.0 alpha?
> 

Depends on what you want in it.  It does basically run now. it doesn't do
everything right, though. What featureset are you looking for?

	Jesse

> -mda
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rt-users mailing list
> rt-users at lists.fsck.com
> http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
> 

-- 
jesse reed vincent --- root at eruditorum.org --- jesse at fsck.com 
pgp keyprint: 50 41 9C 03 D0 BC BC C8 2C B9 77 26 6F E1 EB 91
-------------------------------------------------------------
"It's buried in the desert, got sand in it, melts Nazis. You know,
the Ark of the Covenant"   -- siva