required fields --

[raymond]

another old time request, can we also get the ability to mark fields as required? really would like to make sure things like tickets or assets get all thier fields entered before a tech can save it... one thing about this though is that tickets created via the email connector (or any other automated process) would need to be able to override these required fields as this could cause issues. That said, having the ablity to require an entry on a field that is manually created/modified would be super helpful.

thanks again!!

//ray

[Support Team]

Re: required fields --

Thanks for posting this, it's already logged and I added your +1 for this. You are correct about the Email Connector need to bypass this, so is any connected system and program that is written on top of the RangerMSP API or else it would mean that these integrations might get broken.

[raymond]

Re: required fields --

Just have it required at the manual interface level (this would be safer). When a user is trying to hit the save button (either as a new item or updating an automated created item), a simple sub routine checks all the fields to see if any that have been marked as required are good to go -- save if so, pop up message if not.

//ray

[raymond]

Re: required fields --


Any traction on this? We keep running into situations where our staff is not entering information into "required" fields -- this would be a simple add on (create a check box for each field under "field settings" and have the interface check this requirement before a "save" is executed).

thanks --

//ray

[Support Team]

Re: required fields --

We still have this on file. This feature is more complex than one may think - it involves applying such settings in our API, and possibly affecting third party integrated application when some fields becomes mandatory, it affects the Web interface, it affects the Email Connector that automatically converts incoming emails into Tickets, and more.

We definitely understand the requirement here and will evaluate it again for a future release. Thanks for asking.

[raymond]

Re: required fields --


I didn't think about all the items that touch this and the complexity is understood but really, this isn't an optional feature.

One easy work around is that these fields would only be required if someone manually enters data through the UI, which really is the most important part of this anyhow. That would simplify the process dramatically.

thanks --

//ray

[Support Team]

Re: required fields --

Suggestion noted, thanks again.