Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Disabled dynamic fields shown in CustomerTicketZoom #1447

Open
cugu opened this issue Nov 25, 2021 · 5 comments
Open

Disabled dynamic fields shown in CustomerTicketZoom #1447

cugu opened this issue Nov 25, 2021 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
question Further information is requested
Milestone

Comments

@cugu
Copy link
Contributor

cugu commented Nov 25, 2021

Hi,

The CustomerTicketZoom view shows the fields "process" and "activity" even when they are disabled in the screens.

@reneeb
Copy link
Contributor

reneeb commented Jan 7, 2022

Process and Activity are special as they are always shown in process tickets:

see lines 1713 ..

# output process information in the sidebar

@svenoe This could be configurable as those information can "leak" internal organisational data to customers...

@svenoe
Copy link
Contributor

svenoe commented Jan 10, 2022

I agree. I have not looked into where exactly the info is shown, but if CustomerTicketZoom###DynamicField can be used here, in a sensible way, we should do that, instead of introducing new options. I don't know whether we have two separate places, though. (Maybe we can just disable one, then.)

@reneeb
Copy link
Contributor

reneeb commented Jan 10, 2022

I'll take a closer look at it at the end of the week.

@stefanhaerter
Copy link
Contributor

So far it appears to be the case that, if Process and Activity are enabled vor CustomerTicketZoom, each appears twice in the information widget. This is due to the fact that they are rendered once via the dynamic fields handling and once via the code marked above. So I would suggest to remove the code fragment in Kernel/Modules/CustomerTicketZoom.p, L.1713ff, but before it has to be checked if the handling in Kernel/System/DynamicField/Driver/ProvessManagement/ActivityID.pm and ProcessID.pm is correct.

Another problem has occured to me while investigating this issue. When reaching https://github.com/RotherOSS/otobo/blob/rel-10_1/Kernel/System/ProcessManagement/Activity.pm#L100, some activity entities appear to be broken, like the second item here:

$Activity = {
              "Activity-991d30fdf276f4344bc5b608c24c1b60" => {
                                                               ActivityDialog => { 1 => "ActivityDialog-a66dedc3b5f7213496d52550c0ebef93" },
                                                               ChangeTime => "2022-07-06 06:59:28",
                                                               CreateTime => "2022-07-06 06:59:28",
                                                               ID => 1,
                                                               Name => "TestAktivit\xE4t1",
                                                             },     
              "Activity-e2712e2c4433f53e745b48d94b09a2c3" => {
                                                               1 => "ActivityDialog-967df513b3b04e8e89b0777c0bcc3313",
                                                               ActivityDialog => {}, 
                                                             },     
            }    

Till now, I couldn't figure out how this happens. In the Database as well as in Kernel/Config/Files/ZZZProcessmanagement.pm, the data appears to be correct. I am currently investigating https://github.com/RotherOSS/otobo/blob/rel-10_1/Kernel/Config/Defaults.pm#L2246.

stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 19, 2022
stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 10, 2023
@stefanhaerter stefanhaerter added the question Further information is requested label Oct 5, 2023
@stefanhaerter stefanhaerter added this to the Wishlist milestone Oct 5, 2023
stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 19, 2023
stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 19, 2023
stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 19, 2023
stefanhaerter added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 19, 2023
@stefanhaerter
Copy link
Contributor

Had a thought and wanted to leave this here: How about leaving the hardcoded process and activity information as it is and declaring the corresponding dynamic fields as internal fields, like e.g. ITSMCriticality and ITSMImpact?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants