Query re 1.6 messaging system
I have been playing with the 1.6b3 messaging system. In our practice there are two people who do admin work. Hence if (say) reception needs a new breed added, reception should send a message to both administrators - or to the user group GADMIN which contains them both.
However, the messaging system delivers the message to both users without any indication that it was also sent to the other admin person - and if it was sent to GADMIN, then there is no indication of this.
Also, since there is a invidual message to each user, if Admin1 does the requested work and replies to Reception that its done, the Admin2 person has no indication that the job has been completed.
Is there something I don't understand, because it seems to me that the messaging system is of little use in accomplishing tasks that can be done by multiple people.
Or is there a bug in that the message sent to a group should have only one copy - so that in the above example if Admin1 does the work, then Admin2 will see that it has been done.
I note that act.userMessage has the "to" field set as MaxCardinality=Min=1. Perhaps a way forward is to allow the concept of a group message (with a checkbox on the message screen) where if multiple to's are specified, then the "to" field has more than one entry.
Regards, Tim
Re: Query re 1.6 messaging system
In 1.6, to support messaging multiple users, the message is duplicated for each 'to' user.
The original version a single message with multiple 'to' users, but this would have required database migration which was seen as undesirable so close to the 1.6 release.
It also made managing message statuses difficult (need to have a different status per user, and there is no convenient index to use).
I think what you want to do would be better achieved through a worklist.
Re: Query re 1.6 messaging system
Tim A - thanks - you are correct. I created an 'Admin' waiting list and an 'Admin' task, and this will do the job of allowing reception to queue admin requests to the two administrators.
Regards, Tim G