Actually the "assigned" flag is set automatically at the first reply,
it's the "in progress" that is set by the NGI at this point.
cheers
alessandra
On 06/12/2011 10:38, Alessandra Forti wrote:
> > If there has been mission creep and sites now get all updates just
> by NOTIFY SITE being set then there may indeed be scope to clean up
> the behaviour.
>
> it has always been the case that sites get all the updates just by
> NOTIFY SITE it's fundamentally an assigned ticket without the flag
> 'assigned' which only SU can set as you well said.
>
> cheers
> alessandra
>
> Look at https://ggus.eu/ws/ticket_info.php?ticket=76608 and you will
> see a ticket where NOTIFY SITE, assigned and involved are all used
> (and it is also a TEAM ticket). Interestingly Brunel don't have a
> helpdesk email in GOCDB so I don't know where the notify address came
> from. The NGI has used the GridPP-maintained list of people to be
> contacted for a site so you will see Duncan and Daniela there. John
> -----Original Message----- From: Testbed Support for GridPP member
> institutes [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ewan
> MacMahon Sent: 06 December 2011 00:02 To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Changing tickets to "in progress"
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
>>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Gordon
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what you are trying to say Alessandra. The fact that sites
>>> react to the original NOTIFY SITE is a bonus, not a reason for the
>>> helpdesk to ignore the ticket.
>>>
>> I don't wish to put words in Alessandra's mouth, but I think she's
>> getting at the same issue that I was when I suggested unifying the
>> assigned to/notified fields. Essentially, that once a site know about
>> a ticket and is dealing with it, leaving it in the queue on 'new'
>> tickets for the NGI ticket wranglers to then assign is pointless; it's
>> work for them and it adds nothing. It's good to have people routing
>> tickets to the right places, but there's no point in making them do it
>> to tickets that are already in the right place.
>>
>>> Not all tickets are team tickets and not all tickets use NOTIFY
>>> SITE. We
>>> need a process that makes sure we don't miss tickets.
>>>
>> Indeed, but it would be fine to have the submitter route the ticket, and
>> only have the NGI folk step in for the tickets where they don't.
>>
>> Ewan
|