When new notifications are created on a GLPI version, an upgrade to this version active these notifications.

For example, if you upgrade from 0.84 to 0.90, following notifications will be active after upgrade :

• New change
• Update change
• Resolve change
• Add task
• Update task
• Delete task
• Close change
• Delete change
• New project
• Update project
• Delete project
• Receiver Errors
• New project task
• Update project task
• Delete project task

This is the default behavior of GLPI : new notifications are active. If you don't know, our users may be surprised.

Please disable new notifications after upgrade.

There's currently no option to disable the bottom-right information pop-up that pops when you save any modification in an asset or a ticket.

This pop-up is oftentime masking other important informations/buttons and is not really useful, 99.9% of the time it only states that your modification was successful.

Today in the SNMP inventory it is not possible to select whether or not to bring the resources it brings, such as: Model, Manufacturer, Description, Network Ports, Firmware, etc. There is something similar created in Administration > Inventory, where we can disable some resources We don't want to have the inventory of agents at all, but there is nothing we can deny partial import when we are talking about SNMP inventory.

My suggestion would be precisely that, allowing us to disable the partial import of certain SNMP control information.

This would be useful in the sense of, for example:

I have a scenario where the Network ports of the Switches that were inventoried are conflicting with the device's IP information and that's why I want to make my inventory "cleaner" and more "focused", so I disable the switch's network port inventory, the others data I want to have the complete inventory minus this one.

When a user is reaching the satisfaction survey screen, the rating field is defaulted to 3 stars. Many of our users leave this field to 3 stars instead of providing a real rating. I think it would make more sense to have no default on this field to force the user to provide a relevant rating on his own.

Hello, I would like to suggest an improvement in the location part of GLPI, which allows to define if a location can be related to a ticket or not. The goal is to force the user to choose the most specific location, especially when using multiple hierarchical levels of location, such as city > branch x > floor > room.

This would facilitate the management of tickets, avoiding that the user chooses a generic or incorrect location, and allowing to filter tickets by location more easily. It would also help to avoid unnecessary trips or surprises when attending a ticket in a certain location.

I believe that this functionality would be useful for many users of GLPI, and I hope that it can be implemented in a future version. 

Thank you for your attention.

#######################$$$

Título: Permitir definir se uma localização pode ser relacionada a um chamado ou não

Texto:

Olá, eu gostaria de sugerir uma melhoria na parte de localização do GLPI, que permita definir se uma localização pode ser relacionada a um chamado ou não. O objetivo é poder forçar o usuário a escolher a localização mais específica, em especial quando se utilizam vários níveis hierárquicos de localização, exemplo cidade > filial x > andar > sala.

Isso facilitaria o gerenciamento dos chamados, evitando que o usuário escolha uma localização genérica ou incorreta, e permitindo filtrar os chamados por localização mais facilmente. Também ajudaria a evitar viagens desnecessárias ou surpresas ao atender um chamado em uma determinada localização.

Eu acredito que essa funcionalidade seria útil para muitos usuários do GLPI, e espero que ela possa ser implementada em uma versão futura.

Obrigado pela atenção.

It would be useful to be able to link multiple groups to an asset.

There are cases where multiple teams use an asset and having this possibility would be useful as we could have visibility of which assets a group uses and vice versa which groups use an asset. For example, during maintenance interventions, I can see who uses the asset and notify only those groups.

UPS managment needed whith specifications of this device type and can connection to PC, monitors, ethernet devices (as additional tab in asset page), and can be added to rack managment

When the string of the item "Group in charge of the hardware" is too large, overlapping the item in the next column.

See the image below:

When reduce the font size by the browser the interface looks like this: