[rt-users] Abandoning RT Not for the faint of heart

[Alan Horn]

What browser you using ?

I've had serious problems with opera, which is a shame since its my
preferred browser.

Mozilla and IE deal with this part better.

Of course, it could be something else, but thats my first guess.


On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Walt Reed wrote:

>Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 15:24:00 -0400
>From: Walt Reed <rt at linuxguy.com>
>To: Alan Horn <ahorn at deorth.org>
>Cc: Walt Reed <rt at linuxguy.com>,
>     "Sullivan, Robert (HQP)" <Robert.Sullivan at rhi.com>,
>     rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>Subject: Re: [rt-users] Abandoning RT Not for the faint of heart
>
>I actually still have it installed on the fresh box. The problem I've
>been having is that when I try and login, it dumps me right back to the
>login screen. If you look back in the email achives of this list, my
>guess is that the CGI object is not getting initialized. The session
>cookie doesn't show up, and GET / POST arguments are not there when I
>add some debugging code to print out things like %cookies %ARGS, $user,
>etc. The problem is pretty low-level - before autohandler gets called.
>
>On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 12:07:07PM -0700, Alan Horn said:
>>
>> Walt,
>>
>> I understand where you're coming from on this. It took me a long time to
>> get my head around RT, and I think you're similarly technical.
>>
>> The html::mason aspect of it is something I haven't really delved into it,
>> since I don't need to radically customise the interface.
>>
>> You're right that the documentation isn't as great as it could be (for 2.0
>> at least, I haven't really worked with 3.0 yet)
>>
>> I stuck with trying to get RT working because so many people suggested it
>> to me, peoples who's opinions I respected.
>>
>> I've not seen any other freeware tool out there that comes close to the
>> abilities of RT. Thats why I've gone from being a frustrated systems guy
>> ready to throw it out the window, to being a huge RT advocate.
>>
>> Stick with it a little longer.. if you have any specific questions, send
>> me an email. Apologies, but with workload lately I haven't been watching
>> this list much. I've always had great responses from key members on the
>> list though, once I figured out the basics. Once again, I agree that the
>> barrier to entry could be significantly lowered :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Al
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 1 Oct 2003, Walt Reed wrote:
>>
>> >Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 14:58:00 -0400
>> >From: Walt Reed <rt at linuxguy.com>
>> >To: "Sullivan, Robert (HQP)" <Robert.Sullivan at rhi.com>
>> >Cc: 'Walt Reed' <rt at linuxguy.com>, rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>> >Subject: Re: [rt-users] Abandoning RT Not for the faint of heart
>> >
>> >Hmm. I had no intention of slamming anyone. If anything, pointing out
>> >that the documentation is very weak should help prompt someone to fix
>> >it. I am attempting to give constructive criticism. I posted quite a few
>> >messages and only received one response by someone who wasn't able to
>> >help (no fault on his part...) An inhouse Mason expert who has
>> >developed dozens of large-scale mason-based applications could't figure
>> >the thing out after spending several days on it.
>> >
>> >I was perfectly willing to work with anyone to try and figure out what
>> >went wrong, but nobody with the right expertise stepped up to the plate.
>> >
>> >BTW, I compile all my apps by hand - I'm no stranger to tough manual
>> >configurations. It's VERY rare that I find something I can't work with.
>> >I even recompiled apache, perl, and mod_perl on a new machine to attempt
>> >to get this thing going with the exact same problem.
>> >
>> >If you like RT and are able to get it to work, Great! Don't switch. If
>> >like me you can't get the thing to go, there are other alternatives -
>> >you don't have to keep bashing your head into a brick wall.
>> >
>> >
>> >On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:24:28AM -0700, Sullivan, Robert (HQP) said:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> While RT is not an easy program to get up and running and all evaluations of
>> >> it say that it is not an easy install. The tool does work and work well. I
>> >> agree that it would be nice if it was packaged and one could do a simple
>> >> pkgadd. Also I think that Jesse and the rest of the users on this list do a
>> >> very good job of helping out whene there are questions. I do not blame you
>> >> for going with another product but I think it is a mistake to slam the users
>> >> and author of the RT program.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Walt Reed [mailto:rt at linuxguy.com]
>> >> Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 11:13 AM
>> >> To: rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>> >> Subject: [rt-users] Abandoning RT
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Well, after spending several days trying to get it to work, and trying
>> >> to debug the code, I decided to abandon my efforts to install RT. This
>> >> is too bad because from a feature / demo perspective, RT looks great.
>> >> Unfortuantely, the documentation is very weak, the code seems
>> >> convoluted, and there doesn't seem to be a good way to debug the thing.
>> >> The bottom line is that it just doesn't work.
>> >>
>> >> I see a few other people struggling to get it working too. If you are
>> >> one of those people, you may want to check out http://otrs.org/ which
>> >> seems competitive, works, and seems to be currently maintained.
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> rt-users mailing list
>> >> rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>> >> http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
>> >>
>> >> Have you read the FAQ? The RT FAQ Manager lives at http://fsck.com/rtfm
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >rt-users mailing list
>> >rt-users at lists.fsck.com
>> >http://lists.fsck.com/mailman/listinfo/rt-users
>> >
>> >Have you read the FAQ? The RT FAQ Manager lives at http://fsck.com/rtfm
>> >
>