[rt-devel] RE: [rt-users] Some features I'd like to see

[Daniel Rinehart]

> > Cool. One thing I implemented in req was the ability to split tickets.
> > Sounds like hiearchical tickets will provide this functionality.
> I think there is quite some different kinds of hierarchies out there.  I
> the first kind ... it's dependency.  As we use it here it's more about
> workflow than anything else.  Example:

	I think that last point is the most important. Different places
that use RT are going to have very different work flows in how tickets are
assigned, dealt with, merged, etc. Given the more modular design of RT2 I
think the following might be something to consider.

	Using grouping and parent-child relationships, combined with
logic, a default set of work flows can be created, but also allow
customization based on a particular site's needs.

1) Grouping: This supersedes the "merge" functionality. Two or more
requests on the same subject can be associated with each other and then
actions can be done on the complete set, a subset, or the individual
request. This would also allow easy "unmerging" or "splitting" requests,
should you change your mind.

2) Parent-Child: Single Parent multiple Child. This allows the
ability to create dependencies or subtasks. It would also allow the ability
to divide up a multiple request, request into sub requests which could
then be assigned to different people (most likely by creating new requests
and associating them)

3) Interrelationships: This is where things get icky, but if done, would
add a lot of flexibility or power to the system. Allow groups to be either
the parent or child in a relationship. A example: 5 different people send
is requests that the mail spool is full. Use grouping to associate them to
together. The create 2 child requests one of which is assigned to an admin
to find a quick solution while the other is assigned to purchasing to
order more disk space.

	Logic would be needed to make sure that loops weren't created and
that things like orphaned requests didn't appear in the relationships.
Finding intuitive ways to show this to users gets interesting.

	Maybe I'm just rambling, maybe I've gone off the deep end, but I
thought I'd throw it out.

-- Daniel R. <danielr at ccs.neu.edu> [http://www.ccs.neu.edu/home/danielr/]