More on client logins...
I have had osTicket fully deployed now since the first of March. Prior to deployment, I had fully reviewed no fewer than 8 open source support ticket systems while performing test installs of around half. osTicket was the only one that was easy to understand and configure on my end, and, most importantly extremely easy to navigate from a customer perspective. Kudos to all the developers.
The application, as is, performs flawlessly as it is currently designed. I have no complaints on the existing 1.6 version. However, I do have one suggestion pertaining to client logins to make it easier on the customer/client side for them to be able to manage their support tickets. And, there is a very simple solution.
Currently all tickets are grouped by user and e-mail--quite nice, as access to one ticket provides access to all tickets that a user@emailaddress has opened. However, there is currently no way to effectively provide access to all tickets at a given client site to a client liason at the site. I did try to do this by creating a group called " Liasons." I have Departments created for each company, and the "Group" option allows me to restrict access to tickets by these departments. However, there is one simple element missing that would allow me to be able to create a "client" user with access to all tickets at their site as follows:
There are now five restriction options under the "Group" settings:
Can Create Tickets Yes/No
Can Edit Tickets Yes/No
Can Close Tickets Yes/No
Can Transfer Tickets Yes/No
Can Delete Tickets Yes/No
Can Ban Emails Yes/No
Can Manage Premade Yes/No
With the addition of one other option here:
Can See Internal Comments Yes/No
One would then be able to create a master client-user login, giving them access to all their site tickets by department, without giving them access to one's own proprietary information that one does not want a customer/client to see.
I believe that this would provide a whole new level of add'l functionality with a very simple update, probably for add'l purposes, other than what I've outlined here, as well.
Thanks!
Tim