[rt-users] Default Ticket Owner?

[Nathan Oyler]

> Be careful about doing this!
> 
> We started down that path and quickly discovered that tickets weren't
> getting addressed because the guy we were defaulting to was on
vacation
> and no one else knew about the tickets. A "on vacation" concept was
> considered, but ultimately we did something else.
> 
> We ended up writing a scrip that automatically assigns ownership to
the
> first AdminCC watcher to respond to the ticket. All new tickets
generate
> a notification to all AdminCC watchers. This has three benefits: it
> provides flexibility in terms of who gets ownership, it exposes the
> request to multiple people (faster response time), and users get a
more
> personalized response indicating someone will be working on it.
> 
> For example, a ticket is submitted to the FOO queue. All the adminCCs
> get notified. One adminCC responds with "I'll work on this in 15
> minutes. But I have a question first..." which a) assigns the ticket
to
> the responder, b) opens the ticket, and c) provides useful feedback to
> the requestor that someone is doing something.

I automatically assign after reply as well, but I have never had a
problem with this. When someone is on vacation, their backup takes their
issues, and addresses them.

The same problem would occur when someone assigns a ticket straight to
someone while they are on vacation, it happens. It's the backups
responsibility to deal with their issues, looking over their queue.

This, combined with an incoming issues queue that doesn't get
automatically assigned with people routing tickets, I've never had the
problem.