[rt-users] Approvals - has anyone got it working?

Sat Feb 25 02:52:08 EST 2006

I have now got the Approvals system working after the
help from Jason - thanks Jason.

I do believe that the request from Ken below is the
more sensible way of approaching Approvals however. It
doesn't risk someone working on an unapproved changed
(its easy to overlook the dependency until you try to
Resolve the ticket - i.e. too late!) and is also a
much simpler ticket structure for the majority of
users to understand.

I accept that it would create problems for
multi-approver tickets as there is only a single
ticket per change but maybe a mix n match approach
would be best.

My coding isn't particularly hot but I'm more than
happy to spec out the requirement in more detail, and
to test any of this in our test system if someone
wants to try cut the code?

--- Ken Crocker <KFCrocker at lbl.gov> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
>     We have been using RT for a year now and are
> using RT 3.4.4 in 
> production and 3.4.5 in test (both using Oracle 9i
> with Apache and 
> Perle). We want to use the Approvals concept to set
> up an approval first 
> workflow, BUT we do not want a new ticket to be
> created when the TOP one 
> is resolved. We want the original ticker to simply 
> "move on" to the new 
> Queue assigned. For example; We want to have a Queue
> that reviews 
> requests that would nornally go to several Queues.
> The person that owns 
> the Review/Approval Queue to will get the original
> requests, and upon 
> completing the review, move that request to the
> Queue where the work 
> will be done or if rejected, inform the requestor of
> it's rejection. Is 
> there a script available that would allow us to do
> this? Anyone?
> 
> Kenn
> 
> 
> 
> Jason Fenner wrote:
> 
> > I have just gotten this working today actually.
> >
> > brian mccabe wrote:
> >
> >> Hi All
> >>
> >> I am struggling to get the Approvals system
> working. I
> >> have followed the instructions in Appendix 5 and
> the
> >> ApprovalCreation wiki but it still does not work
> as I
> >> expect it to.
> >>
> >> I have created a Queue called "Change Requests"
> and -
> >> other than that - have followed the
> ApprovalCreation
> >> wiki to the letter.
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> > Sounds good so far.
> >
> >> When I submit a new ticket to the Change Requests
> >> queue, it spawns a separate "depended on by"
> approval
> >> ticket as expected - however -
> >>
> >> * both tickets are owned by Nobody. My
> understanding
> >> is that the approval ticket should somehow become
> >> automatically owned by the person(s) who need to
> >> approve/reject it. Without the owner being set,
> the
> >> ticket does not show in the Approvals tab on the
> >> approvers screen. I have set the approvers as
> >> AdminCC's for the queue but this appears to have
> no
> >> impact. How does the system identify which
> person(s)
> >> need to approve a change and where is this set?
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >
> > As you already know, the approval system works
> simply be generating 
> > new tickets that the TOP ticket depends upon the
> resolution of.  
> > Therefore in the scrip that executes CreateTicket
> it has to be 
> > specified who the generated tickets are supposed
> to belong to.  Somone 
> > has to own the generated tickets.  Hence why your
> template needs to 
> > have the pragma "Owner:" set.  You can set the
> template to create 
> > tickets, one for each user of a specific group and
> assign them to the 
> > users of the group. Look again at the two wiki
> pages you refereced, 
> > example template code is there.
> >
> >> * the un-approved child ticket is visible in the
> >> Change Requests queue with a status of NEW even
> though
> >> the approval ticket has not been approved.
> Someone
> >> could very easily work on this and only find out
> it
> >> wasn't approved when they finally got around to
> >> resolving it and was hit with the dependency
> >> restriction. I thought the child ticket would be
> >> 'invisible' (or at least have a UNAPPROVED status
> of
> >> some sort) until the approval ticket was approved
> or
> >> not?
> >>  
> >>
> > Well, the unapproved ticket is visible to a user
> who has rights to see 
> > it.  But it does correctly label it as
> un-approved.  But the ticket IS 
> > new, so the status is correct.  Also, if you click
> on the ticket it 
> > shows the staff memeber that the ticket is still
> depending on a 
> > unresolved ticket.  The tech CAN change status to
> Open if allowed by 
> > his rights.  But as with ANY dependent tickets, it
> cannot be resolved 
> > until the dependency is cleared.  You can fine
> tune some of this by 
> > adjusting security settings...for instance set it
> so that staff 
> > memeber cannot change status on these tickets,
> etc.
> >
> >> I'm sure I must have missed something basic here
> but
> >> have checked and double-checked against the
> >> documentation and can't get it to work.
> >>
> >> Any help would be appreciated. RT Version 3.4.5.1
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance
> >>
> >> Brian
> >>
> >>
> >>        
> >>
>
___________________________________________________________
> To help 
> >> you stay safe and secure online, we've developed
> the all new Yahoo! 
> >> Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >>
>
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
> >>
> >> Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at
> http://wiki.bestpractical.com
> >>
> >> Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials
> from O'Reilly Media 
> >> at http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
> >>
> >> WE'RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in
> Amsterdam, Boston and
> >> San Francisco - Find out more at 
> >> http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html
> >>
> >>  
> >>
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
>
http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
> >
> > Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at
> http://wiki.bestpractical.com
> >
> > Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials
> from O'Reilly Media at 
> > http://rtbook.bestpractical.com
> >
> > WE'RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in
> Amsterdam, Boston and
> > San Francisco - Find out more at 
> > http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html
> >
> 

___________________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Messenger - NEW crystal clear PC to PC calling worldwide with voicemail http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com