On Fri, 2003-07-25 at 13:56, Moshe Livne (Leibovitch) wrote:
Our agents raised the issue that sometimes there is a situation where one agent answers a ticket and then another, more senior agent wants to add something. The best would be to quote the junior agent reply. This is not possible today - you can only answer when focused on the customer last answer.<<
My colleagues and I frequently want to be able to do that too. What we end up doing is (mis-)use Forward, which appears on every article type. The drawbacks are that you have to enter the customer address manually, perform extra surgery on the quoted text, and remove -FW from the ticket number in the subject line. Because we don't always remember to do the last bit, I have modified my procmail filter to remove it from incoming messages to avoid replies creating new tickets. I have never understood why Forward is given more prominence than Compose Answer, though. According to the documentation, Forward is to "Forward tickets if the email wasn't for your OTRS system." If a ticket is for the wrong system, why would a thread ever develop beyond the first message, and hence why should there ever be a need to forward from an internal note, for instance? However, as long as Forward is not replaced by Compose Answer, I'm not arguing for its removal :-) Jim