First of all...greate job with what you guys are doing. Keep working like that!!!

My suggestion:

Add the habilitie to notify via email about historical changes made in the inventoried actives. For example:

- Know when a memory RAM or drive or any other hardware component or software were removed from an inventoried active.

- Notify about this change

- A global view where we would be able to see these changes without enter to each actives one by one.

Today it is possible to promote a ticket, however it is necessary to give permission to update followups in the profile to enable the icon, but it is not always interesting to enable this permission, it would be interesting if there was an option to permit only this feature.

Hoje é possível promover um ticket, porém é necessário dar permissão para atualizar acompanhamentos no perfil para habilitar o ícone, mas nem sempre é interessante habilitar essa permissão, seria interessante se houvesse uma opção para permitir apenas esse recurso.

Is it possible to integrate Microsoft Teams and Planner as a plugin or any other way? This would be very helpful, because Microsoft does not have a Ticket System in Teams and Planner - this could be a big chance for GLPI!

It could be usefull to manage not only license for software/computers. For example license keys for appliance, network devices ect.

Dipatch operators don't always now people on vacation, and can assign tickets to them by mistake, a simple out of office checkbox, or even better a calendar could visually show someone that a user in on vacation (Like name in red in dropdown lists)

Hi,

import and export data is an importante feature for any asset management softwares. This plugin was not ported for the 9.2.x version...

Thx

dn: cn=it,cn=groups,dc=server,dc=example,dc=com
objectClass: top
objectClass: posixGroup
objectClass: extensibleObject
objectClass: apple-group
cn: it
gidNumber: 1042
apple-generateduid: DD3E22B4-3A8D-4B97-9BC4-0B10CA63273F
apple-group-nestedgroup: F22A5302-5D54-4999-AB01-1FDEB090CDE0
apple-group-nestedgroup: 4F53966E-2D4D-4384-9CB1-C394D3369540
apple-group-nestedgroup: BCF923D7-C33B-4EAF-9082-F77FB17DE856
apple-group-realname: IT
apple-ownerguid: 10F3F6CA-7711-42A8-A614-808B897F53DE
description: IT department

dn: cn=it-ext,cn=groups,dc=server,dc=example,dc=com
objectClass: top
objectClass: posixGroup
objectClass: extensibleObject
objectClass: apple-group
cn: it-ext
gidNumber: 1533
apple-generateduid: 4F53966E-2D4D-4384-9CB1-C394D3369540
apple-group-memberguid: B10E526D-4282-456B-8F0A-5A033FBDDA61
apple-group-memberguid: 34431329-95E4-496A-AB43-368A0E212F99
apple-group-realname: External IT members
description: IT members who aren't employees but contractors
memberUid: yoanngini
memberUid: bob

This isn't supported by GLPI at this time and it could be really awesome to add a method to support this.

Context: I use the Documents (from Management) to store some user manuals, technical specifications, firmwares, utility softwares about my computers, network equipment, printers, etc.

If a technician needs the user guide about the computer he is repairing he does not have to look on the Internet or find the physical manual (if any): he just goes to the "Documents" tab of the asset.

This solution works fine but have a major drawback: documents can be associated to single/individual asset. So if I have three servers of the same model (eg. BrandX SupermodelY) I'll have to associate my user manuals to theses three assets. If in the future I acquire a fourth SupermodelY server: let's hope I won't forget to associate it to my user manuals.

What I suggest is the ability to associate a document to some dropdowns, for examples:

• The models (Computer models, Networking equipment models, Printer models, Monitor models, Peripheral models, Phone models).
• Virtualization systems
• Operating systems

Then, I'll associate my BrandX SupermodelY user guide to the "BrandX SupermodelY" computer model, and any past or future computer asset that is of model "BrandX SupermodelY" will have the user guide listed in it's "Documents" tab.

As an implementation reference: it is already possible to associate documents to "Locations" (but, where it differs from my idea, is that I don't see any implication on assets set on that location).

Good night,

I just installed GLPI 10.0.11 and I would like to set some fields as required(mandatory) when we register an asset in computers. I have been researching and from what I see it is only possible to create required fields in ticket templates or using the "Form validation" plugin.

FormValidation Plugin: https://github.com/tomolimo/formvalidation

I have tried(install) the Form Validation plugin, but from what I have seen it only allows mandatory fields to be created during the user session and we cannotapply simultaneously to several users.

This is the message from the plugin: Edit mode (valid for current session only, will be reset at next login)

Not finding a way to create mandatory fields, I tried to modify the glpi_computers table of the DB (glpi) by executing the following command:

ALTER TABLE glpi_computers MODIFY name VARCHAR(255) NOT NULL DEFAULT 'mandatory';

However, you could still add teams with the "name" field empty. Is there an option to create mandatory fields in computer assets?

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.