[Rt-devel] RT Priority logic - going against the grain

[Andy Jewell]

|> Is there any problem with us using priority number which have 1 as
|> HIGHEST setting? I know this is the opposite of how they are
|> explained in the wiki, but our manager wants them to work "the way
|> everyone else works". If we don't want to use automatic changes to
|> priorities, will this have any negative affect?
|>
|> The notion is that our customers will expect Priority 1 to mean "Top
|> Priority".  "Priority 99" would convey they lowest of the low
|> priority.
|
|Certain portlets are sorted by priority by default, you'll want to
|change the default sorts.

Excellent - I'll have a look at that.

|If you actually want words, have you considered
|RT-Extension-PriorityAsString?
|
|> Example:
|> 1 - Major
|> 2 - High
|> 3 - Medium
|> 4 - Normal
|> 5 - Low
|>
|> I'm currently testing out custom fields for this, but it seems
|> clunky, and of course, it's not possible to display them (by default
|> at least) in RT-at-a-glance.
|
|I'm not sure what you mean, you can change the default RT-at-a-glance
|screen's results format, just like you could change the sort order.

Sorry, I didn't phrase that very well. What I mean is:

By default, custom fields are not available for display in the RT-at-a-glance, and even if they were, setting them is rather inconvenient for tickets created via e-mail or the RT-API, so although we could use a custom field, we would rather not. 

I think with your suggestion, we should be able to use textual names and still work "in harmony" with RT. Thanks for your reply.

Andy D'Arcy Jewell
SysMicro Linux Support

T:  +44 (0) 844 991 8804
M: +44 (0) 7961 605631
F:  +44 (0) 844 357 7020
E:  andy.jewell at sysmicro.co.uk
W: www.sysmicro.co.uk

CRN THE CHANNEL AWARDS 2009 WINNER
SysMicro named CRN’s Editor’s Choice for Emerging Business of the Year 2009, recognising SysMicro for our considerable growth, specifically in Enterprise Solutions.
________________________________________