[rt-users] help needed for RT 3.06 email workflow

[Stefan Seiz]

On 07.11.2003 17:16 Uhr, Jim Rowan <jim.rowan at starcore-dsp.com> wrote:

>> BUT i'd like to know if someone has an idea on how to
>> implement my workflow. What i'd like is some scrip to somehow
>> Notify ALL email addresses which have ever replied to a
>> ticket no matter if these email-addresses are real RT-Users
>> or not. Which would be all email addresses from ALL
>> attachments belonging to a certain ticket.
>> 
>> An alternative might ba to have a custom scrip which adds the
>> sender of an email as a CC-Watcher "On Correspond" (given the
>> address is not already a watcher).
> 
> I think this latter option is what you should do.  It should be pretty
> straightforward. 

If only I could find some good examples of how to do custom scrips. I can't
get my head arround to understand what to do with the custom-condition,
preparation and cleanup-code etc.
If someone would have a good example, that'd help tremendously.

> However, your logic seems to have a a couple of slight
> flaws.  (may not matter in your particular scenario, though):
> 
> 1.) If PersonA forwards the mail to PersonB, then it does not go to RT,
> and RT is unaware (at this point) that PersonB is involved.  Only after
> PersonB responds will RT include them in future interactions.  If some
> transaction occurs on the ticket before this time, PersonB won't get
> notified.

Which is OK in my case. For me it is sufficient involving RT after PersonB
replies.

> 2.) The reliability seems quite fragile; it depends strongly on exactly
> how PersonA forwards (redirects) the mail to PersonB and on how PersonB
> replies.  One problem would be that PersonB's mail would go back to
> PersonA, instead of going to RT.

Can be handeled by instructing the few people involved here (in redirecting
the messages initialy).

> 3.) All these tickets stay open, and owned by "nobody"?  What is the
> point of using RT at all here?  Why the aversion to having PersonA use
> the web interface?

The point here is, that we are a manufacturing company and get leads to the
info at addresses - this leads usually are forwarded to a specific person in
inside-sales and then to a REP or Distributor. Using RT makes sure all
communication travels through RT's database and we have a nice, complete
history of all communication from various people involved (even outside our
company) about a specific lead. This is possible since we can hide the
ORIGINAl Requestors email-address so all replies go through RT.
 
> Another point: if this is the workflow you really want, you may be
> better off with RT2.  It has the ability to manipulate the ticket
> ownership and state via email, so you could close some of the holes I
> mention above.

Yes, RT2 would work if we'd only have ONE Language involved. But due to the
Lack of Unicode support, RT2 really isn't an option. We need to support all
european languages and some asian languages which can't be handeled with
ISO-8851...

--
<http://www.StefanSeiz.com>
Spamto: <bin at imd.net>