starred/CIPP

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/KelvinTegelaar/CIPP.git synced 2026-04-25 08:16:01 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #110] Feature Request: PSA - Reference Ticket #67

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-03-02 12:03:34 +03:00 by kerem · 3 comments

kerem commented

2026-03-02 12:03:34 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @scubes13 on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/KelvinTegelaar/CIPP/issues/110

When performing a task in CIPP, allow a field to reference a ticket number from the company's associated PSA. Allow to make this a required field.

Add fields to select the Type of PSA (CWM, AutoTask, etc.), the URL for the PSA, etc.

Once a task is executed and logged, add a constructed link back to the PSA Ticket using the Ticket field and the URL of the PSA.

Extra Credit: Log an internal note in the ticket with the results of the task.

Originally created by @scubes13 on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/KelvinTegelaar/CIPP/issues/110 When performing a task in CIPP, allow a field to reference a ticket number from the company's associated PSA. Allow to make this a required field. Add fields to select the Type of PSA (CWM, AutoTask, etc.), the URL for the PSA, etc. Once a task is executed and logged, add a constructed link back to the PSA Ticket using the Ticket field and the URL of the PSA. Extra Credit: Log an internal note in the ticket with the results of the task.

kerem

2026-03-02 12:03:34 +03:00

closed this issue
added the
wontfix
label

kerem commented

2026-03-02 12:03:35 +03:00

Author

Owner

@KelvinTegelaar commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021):

Out of scope. We will not integrate with any vendor directly until at least version 2.0. This is to prevent favoritism and doing the work for vendors that have lagged behind for free. even if it is just a entry-frield, this also would cause a slowdown in workflow so for now, This enhancement is a "wontfix".

Do feel free to make a new FR when 2.0 gets released.

@KelvinTegelaar commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021): Out of scope. We will not integrate with any vendor directly until at least version 2.0. This is to prevent favoritism and doing the work for vendors that have lagged behind for free. even if it is just a entry-frield, this also would cause a slowdown in workflow so for now, This enhancement is a "wontfix". Do feel free to make a new FR when 2.0 gets released.

kerem commented

2026-03-02 12:03:36 +03:00

Author

Owner

@scubes13 commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021):

Shouldn't it be more about the needs of the MSP rather than sticking it to a vendor because of their slow or non-existent development?

If nothing else, is there a way to at least mark this as "revisit in 2.0" rather than just closing it out?

@scubes13 commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021): Shouldn't it be more about the needs of the MSP rather than sticking it to a vendor because of their slow or non-existent development? If nothing else, is there a way to at least mark this as "revisit in 2.0" rather than just closing it out?

kerem commented

2026-03-02 12:03:36 +03:00

Author

Owner

@KelvinTegelaar commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021):

The needs of the MSP and not helping vendors are one and the same. If vendors see that a project such as this is popular and they are missing out; their development will sync up. We've already caused several vendors to go into an accelerated development mode just with our first couple of weeks of release.

If we integrate to their products for free they'll be the laughing third - They won't have to put any time into development and gain a huge benefit and extra income over the back of voluntary contributors, which are putting in amazing efforts of time and money into this project. We're not "Sticking it to the vendors" but are showing them their market can easily be disrupted by a project such as this.

But, as this is a completely open source project, if you happen to develop this integration, feel free to send us a PR and we'll discuss. For now this is closed, and we might revisit at a later date.

@KelvinTegelaar commented on GitHub (Oct 25, 2021): The needs of the MSP and not helping vendors are one and the same. If vendors see that a project such as this is popular and they are missing out; their development will sync up. We've already caused several vendors to go into an accelerated development mode just with our first couple of weeks of release. If we integrate to their products for free they'll be the laughing third - They won't have to put any time into development and gain a huge benefit and extra income over the back of voluntary contributors, which are putting in amazing efforts of time and money into this project. We're not "Sticking it to the vendors" but are showing them their market can easily be disrupted by a project such as this. But, as this is a completely open source project, if you happen to develop this integration, feel free to send us a PR and we'll discuss. For now this is closed, and we might revisit at a later date.

kerem referenced this issue

2026-03-02 13:54:55 +03:00

[PR #67] [MERGED] Added missed datatable load. #2667

No milestone

No project

No assignees

1 participant

Notifications

Due date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference

starred/CIPP#67

No description provided.

Rows
Columns