| Anonymous | Login | Signup for a new account | 2021-01-15 18:00 GMT |  |
| Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap |
| View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||||||
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||||||
| 0000669 | SiT! | incidents | public | 2009-04-28 13:37 | 2009-04-28 16:16 | ||||||||
| Reporter | nicdev | ||||||||||||
| Assigned To | |||||||||||||
| Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always | ||||||||
| Status | confirmed | Resolution | open | ||||||||||
| Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||||||
| Product Version | 3.45 | ||||||||||||
| Target Version | Fixed in Version | ||||||||||||
| Summary | 0000669: Temporary assignment of incidents not retried when user back from holiday | ||||||||||||
| Description | When an engineer, marks himself as "On holiday", and his backup is at that very moment on any "not accepting" status, the cases appear in the holding queue - which is correct. But when the backup engineer changes his status back to "accepting" the system should check for these case that could not be assigned before, and assign them at this time - As the current version stands this does not happen. | ||||||||||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||||||||
| Attached Files | |||||||||||||
 Relationships |
 Notes |
|
 (0000981)kieran (administrator) 2009-04-28 14:23 |
Slight edge case, but what if on re-opening, the original owner is not in the office, or has left the company? Is it not useful in that case to have the temp owner remaining? I don't either is the "correct" behaviour btw, there's pros and cons. |
 (0000982)nicdev (developer) 2009-04-28 14:35 |
Hi Kieran, Yeah i agree it is an edge case, and we argued both sides in the office, i suppose it would be difficult to decide, but we could say in this case, to put it in the holding queue...? The bigger problem is really the first point in the report, where an engineer marks himself on holiday, when his backup is on "not accepting" ... We believe the system should check again when the backup changes his status to "accepting", for any re-assignments .. |
 (0000983)ivan (administrator) 2009-04-28 15:56 |
I agree we should make SiT retry the auto reassign when a user comes back to 'accepting'. I'm moving your other point to another bug report. Thanks. |
|
Notes |
|
Issue History |
|||
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
| 2009-04-28 13:37 | nicdev | New Issue | |
| 2009-04-28 14:23 | kieran | Note Added: 0000981 | |
| 2009-04-28 14:35 | nicdev | Note Added: 0000982 | |
| 2009-04-28 15:56 | ivan | Note Added: 0000983 | |
| 2009-04-28 15:56 | ivan | Status | new => confirmed |
| 2009-04-28 15:56 | ivan | Summary | Wrong flow in temporary assignment of incidents => Temporary assignment of incidents not retried when user back from holiday |
| 2009-04-28 15:56 | ivan | Description Updated | |
| 2009-04-28 16:16 | ivan | Relationship added | related to 0000670 |
|
Issue History |
| Copyright © 2000 - 2021 MantisBT Team |
|