[rt-users] RT State of the Onion?

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 01:18:06PM -0600, Kelly F. Hickel wrote:
> The first one is a common requirement.  We have a database with all of
> our customer details in it (ok, well, we have a db that nearly has all
> the stuff in it and some of it is even correct).  We need to link a
> ticket to a customer record, not to a person who happens to have been
> employed by that customer at the time the defect was opened.  Ideally
> Customers (which really means Companies that Have our products) would
> have "persons" as sub records.
> 
> The idea is that a customer may have opened 10 tickets, but their
> contact information and details about what database they're running,
> what product(s) they are licensed for, what servers are located where,
> what hardware they're running on, are all things that a person reviewing
> a ticket needs access to, but you don't want to have to enter it for
> each ticket.

And, just as much, that you should be able to see "all tickets open for
this customer" so that you can tell whether an incoming call applies to
one of them, or is something new -- which speaks to my third point.

Thank you, Kelly.  Everyone else's reactions to "customer file" were
beginning to make me think *I* was nutsabago.

> With RT you can whip up some kind of url link or something, but there
> really needs to be a nice clean interface to some place where the above
> data is kept.

And, as noted, *some* of that can be done with, say, AT... but I don't
think you can do all of it.

I don't know, because I don't seem to be able to get a good look at 3.6
without installing the damned thing.

Cheers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274