<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Robert,<br>
<br>
To confuse things even farther, RT can be installed with Incident
Tracker (RT::IR) that extend's RT's functionality. The company I work
for uses it to process incoming abuse tickets. The work flow for that
looks roughly like this:<br>
<br>
(In this example, I'll use an incoming Spamcop message as the example)<br>
<br>
SpamCop -> RT Incident Reports Queue -> Support Rep via Web ->
Outbound Investigation Ticket to our Customer<br>
*Customer Fixes Issue causing Abuse*<br>
Customer Replies Via Email To Investigation Ticket -> Support Rep
via Web<br>
Support Rep via Web responds back to original Incident Report, and
Investigation tickets and then closes all of them at once.<br>
<br>
One of the great features about RT::IR is it's ability to link the
different tickets together. So the incoming ticket from the abuse
reporter is linked to an incident ticket(that can be linked to RTFM
articles and other tickets), which is then linked to an outbound
investigation ticket to our customer.<br>
<br>
I send this just to demonstrate that RT is very powerful and can be set
up MANY different ways. Just takes time tweaking it to work the way you
want.<br>
<br>
Max<br>
<br>
<br>
Robert Nesius wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:cac10ddc0911251237s22537b46o4ce0615a6d87469a@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Thanks very much, Mike. <br>
<br>
My experience with ticket systems in the past is a bit different from
RT, and your post illuminated that more clearly. The work flow i've
used in the past is: <br>
<br>
Customer -> Support - Help <br>
Support -> Customer - clarifying question (which creates an email) <br>
customer -> support - response (via email) <br>
support -> customer - another question or detail (via email) <br>
<br>
During these interactions happening in email, the ticket system is CC'd
and silently logs each new iteration into the ticket history, from
which the entire history can be replayed. Additionally, the ticket
system always displayed all past interactions underneath the new
data... so it could be referenced if necessary. <br>
<br>
I see now more clearly RT isn't quite intended to work that way and
that the intent is for ticket owners to really use the web application
as the interface versus email. I think that's a paradigm shift I can
make. I'm not sure I like it, but I think that feeling of discomfort
stems from a lack of experience, and over time I may even like RT's
approach better. <br>
<br>
Thanks again for your very articulate and illuminating response. <br>
<br>
-Rob<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 2:13 PM, Mike
Johnson <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Mike.Johnson@normed.ca">Mike.Johnson@normed.ca</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div
style="margin: 4px 4px 1px; font-family: Tahoma; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;">
<div>This isn't exactly what you are wanting, but a suitable
workaround, and is actually what I believe to be RT's intent.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>There are 2 ways to initiate a communication out of RT to an
end user. What I like to call Global reply button, and Inline reply
button.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Global reply button, located at the very top of the page when
displaying a ticket, just opens the comment form with a blank text
area(unless you have a signature it is including).</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Inline reply button, located beside each transaction within
the history of the ticket, opens up the comment form with the
transaction associated to the reply button you clicked copied into the
message area.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The reasoning behind this(I believe) is so that you can
specifically reference a transaction(typically a previous communication
from the customer) when replying OR asking something new of the
customer related to the ticket itself.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Now, out-of-the-box, RT doesn't allow you to control what is
being pulled into the ticket from the external actions(customer
replying to your correspondence). But, if you are controlling what is
going out, that will "somewhat" control what the customer will reply
back with. If you teach your RT users to use the 2 different ways of
replying, it can save you the hassle of having to strip old messages.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>The reasoning behind the 2 replies can also be applied to how
the customer would reply to RT as well. Most customers will simply hit
reply, which will include what they are replying about...<br>
<br>
Should for whatever reason that customer's reply be related to a
previous communication... it will be included in their reply... I
personally wouldn't want to strip that out, it provides context to
their communication.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Again, just my personal opinions above, but I think it makes a
solid case for not having to do any customization to RT...</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Good Luck!</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div>Mike Johnson<br>
Datatel Programmer/Analyst<br>
Northern Ontario School of Medicine<br>
955 Oliver Road<br>
Thunder Bay, ON P7B 5E1<br>
Phone: 807.766.7331<br>
Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:mike.johnson@normed.ca"
target="_blank">mike.johnson@normed.ca</a></div>
<div>Technology assistance: email <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nosmhelpdesk@normed.ca" target="_blank">nosmhelpdesk@normed.ca</a>
<br>
Technology Emergency Contact (TEC) Mon-Fri, 8am to 5pm excluding stat
holidays: <br>
Off campus toll free 1-800-461-8777, option 8, or locally either <br>
(705)-662-7120 or (807)-766-7500<br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
>>> Robert Nesius <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:nesius@gmail.com" target="_blank">nesius@gmail.com</a>>
25/11/2009 2:30 pm >>>
<div>
<div class="h5"><br>
<br>
The environment I'm about to roll out RT into is pretty much 100%
Outlook/Exchange. Something I'm noticing is that when I respond to a
ticket via email, not only is my response included, but the entire
thread underneath it. I'd like to RT to drop everything beginning from
the pattern of: <br>
<br>
/^----- Original Message ----- .*/<br>
<br>
<br>
I'm having a hard time tracking down where exactly to do this
trimming... I figured out rt-mailgate is just feeding a parsed mime
object to the server, so somewhere in the server code that handles
responses I'd need to prune that. I can't imagine I'm the first person
to want this, but I can't find an extension or config option. Can
someone point me in the right direction - either to the correct area in
the source to consider, or to docs about config options I'm missed? <br>
<br>
Thanks in advance. <br>
<br>
-Rob<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users">http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users</a>
Community help: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.bestpractical.com">http://wiki.bestpractical.com</a>
Commercial support: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sales@bestpractical.com">sales@bestpractical.com</a>
Discover RT's hidden secrets with RT Essentials from O'Reilly Media.
Buy a copy at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://rtbook.bestpractical.com">http://rtbook.bestpractical.com</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>