More feature requests

slack · 2006-05-04 02:41:18

I've almost got my entire inventory into GLPI and it's working out great!

I made some comments in another thread, but after working with GLPI all day every day for the past week I have some refined suggestions/requests, and I'm not seeing them on the development roadmap:

1) This has been mentioned, but it's really important: we need a better way of entering items into dropdowns. It's extremely frustrating to have to leave the current form to go add a company or model number or firmware revision, etc. It would be *great* if there were a button next to each dropdown that would open a popup allowing us to add the necessary item to the menu. With AJAX this should be very possible. Another example of having to click to much is when trying to add a new document to a computer or device. Why can't we just add the document right from the computer->document page?

2) Better importation from OCS-ng: right now GLPI doesn't seem to import things like controllers. I also wish that GLPI was a little smarter about importing things like shared printers that aren't physically attached to a machine. It might be really nice if there was a user-editable import map where we could define which fields from OCS to import into which fields in GLPI.

3) Better distinction between internal and "external" devices: GLPI imports things like external USB modems as *internal* devices. Not a big deal really, except that external devices tend to move around a lot and sometimes need to be managed globally. Also, internal devices must be added to a specific computer making it impossible to maintain a spare parts inventory. I have spare power supplies, hard drives, fans, video cards, and all sorts of things that I'd like to add to my inventory, but there isn't any way to do this. It would also be nice to be able to attach documents to spare internal devices. Perhaps it would be easier if all devices were just "devices" that had an internal/external flag, and they could be managed via one interface.

4) It would be great if we could create custom report templates.

5) The LDAP authentication is nice and I got it running pretty quickly (Active Directory, Win2k server). However, this is a really dangerous feature as is, because the browser by default is going to cache the user's password in plain text when they log in, and the password is also sent weakly over the network. In a windows domain environment, the user's credentials will thus be available to malicious users and programs. It would be nice if there was just an LDAP synchronization feature that would import all active (non-disabled) users from the LDAP server that meet a specific criteria (e.g. group membership). It would be even cooler if there was a single sign-on feature, but that might require than an IIS server (is there an apache mod?) be available for AD networks. I wrote some LDAP sync and single-sign scripts for Joomla a while ago and it's been very beneficial and much safer.

Anyhow, this is some excellent software. I've been looking for something like this for a long time, and nothing has been as simple yet powerful (and GPL!).

raffas · 2006-05-04 08:52:31

Add my vote for item #1.

http://glpi.indepnet.org/forum/viewtopic.php?id=2737

Last edited by raffas (2006-05-04 13:08:04)

raffas · 2006-05-17 07:38:15

Just out of curiosity - are the developers of GLPI aware of this feature request?
Any ideas about when will this feature be implemeted?

MoYo · 2006-05-24 08:06:05

GLPI devs have not the time to read and make responses to every posts very quickly.

1 - It is true but there is no easy system to integrate this. We know this problem and we try to make it easier to populate the database but it is not so simple.
2 - A user editable map means that there are several choices to make the import but at that time it is not the true due to the data stored in OCS and the data we have in GLPI.
3 - It is not really a GLPI problem. OCS does not do the difference.
4 - No so easy to do. If you develop it there is no problem to integrate it.
5 - There is also a SSO system named CAS in GLPI. For simple SSO with AD there are some patch in the forum to do it.

Thanks

slack · 2006-05-25 00:31:30

#3 might not be a "glpi problem", but the most important part of my comment (to me) is the ability to manage internal devices without having them be tied to a specific computer. This would help greatly with managing a spare parts inventory. Personally I don't see why there should necessarily be such a distinction between internal and external devices. Having the capability to manage all devices with the same power we currently have over external devices would be great.

For instance, I might have a bunch of spare hard drives that are not currently installed in any machines. I would like to be able to enter these into the system, complete with model number, interface type, serial number, purchase date, warranty information, etc etc. So when a drive in Machine X fails, I can look in my inventory to see instantly if there are any spares available, whether a particular spare is a new drive or a refurb/replacement, and also pull up the warranty information for the drive that died. Then from glpi I can replace the bad hard drive with the spare, and change the spare's status to "dead", "RMA'd", or whatever.

So basically, I'd like the same power over internal devices as I have over external devices. Right now I could fake it by entering every spare component as an external device and then deleting it and recreating it as an internal device (and putting all the extra fields in the comments box). That's not fun.

Jinx · 2006-05-26 00:21:15

Just using GLPI over the last few days, there are a couple of suggested features I would like to add:

1. In the OCSNG admin section there is an option to "Limit the importation to the following tags (separator $, nothing for all)". It would be good to be able to exclude certain hardware from being updated.

An example of this is, we have students here with Fujitsu laptops that report a different serial number than the serial number written on the bottom of the machine. So in order to log these machines in for service, we have to use the number at the base of the laptop, not the one reported by OCS.

Most of our other machines are reporting correct serial numbers. So, when OCS imports it would be good to be able to set it up so it does not overwrite the serial number that has been entered manually.

I can understand that there would be a certain level of complication if you excluded certain fields for certain pieces of hardware, but hopefully it isn't such a problem to exclude machines based on computer name or tag.

So in short: "Exclusive excludes" would be good to add to the already existing option of "exclusive includes".

2. In regards to the LDAP auth - it would be great to be able to allow access control via LDAP groups. For example the group "staff" would get "post-only" access. Whilst the group "itstaff" get "admin" access.

Cya round
Jinx

slack · 2006-05-26 20:04:35

GLPI shouldn't overwrite your serial numbers. Pull up a computer and click the OSNG tab. At the bottom of that page you'll see the locked fields, which should be: Model, Serial Number, Contact, Manufacturer.

slack · 2006-05-26 20:16:49

One thing that will happen is that a computer can be "magically" replaced if it has multiple network adapters (for instance a laptop that has a wireless adapter and a physical port, and the user switches back and forth between the two). This is in part because ocs is not very smart about host identification, and create duplicates. Thankfully it's easy to deal with duplicates in OCSNG, but GLPI just seems to delete the "old" machine and import the new one...so you have to delete the incorrect one and restore the deleted one. Because of this it can appear that fields were overwritten, when in fact the entire machine was overwritten.

The importation from ocs-ng is probably one of the most enticing features about GLPI, but in the long run it's only good for getting GLPI setup. Using it over time will just cause more headaches that it's worth.... software licenses get all screwed up, duplicate computers cause problems, etc.

Perhaps the GLPI project should fork the OCSNG project and tighten this whole mess up. Each by itself is lacking, but if they worked together in a way that was more dependable it'd be a dream.

I just had an idea...if there was either a confirmation or report of exactly what was modified for each computer during the synch with ocs, a lot of these problems might be easier to deal with until the system as a whole becomes more dependable.

Last edited by slack (2006-05-26 20:17:32)

MoYo · 2006-05-26 21:55:13

Not really duplicate may works...
We check the duplicate history in OCS and make new link.
There is a problem in the 0.65 but it could be solved in the 0.68 I hope.

slack, for the spare problem of internal devices it is planned to be integrated in GLPI but not in the 0.68.

Jinx · 2006-05-29 04:17:17

Thanks for the tip Slack. I noticed that under the OCSNG setup you can tell it not to import serial numbers. It still seems to, but only if they don't exist. Haven't had the system running for long enough to confirm if this is the case though.

Understandably automating an inventory of all network devices and their various aspects is a pretty heavy task. So, yeah - it would be a dream to see it working in a manner that does not cause headache.

I have found if you select the OCSNG option to link new computers with existing GLPI computers, you can go through and filter duplicates that way. Not going to import any more "new" machines until they are confirmed not to exist in the database already.

Cya round
Jinx

slack · 2006-05-30 23:34:16

MoYo wrote:

slack, for the spare problem of internal devices it is planned to be integrated in GLPI but not in the 0.68.

Wonderful! I'll look forward to it.

Jinx · 2006-05-31 00:34:29

Not to hijack slack's thread, but there is another feature I thought would be useful. That is the integration of some form of Groupware functionality into GLPI. Obviously there is the Planner and Contacts, but it would be good to be able to use GLPI as an integrated part of something like OpenGroupWare. This means you don't have to keep seperate calendars and email clients for use outside of GLPI. Planner appointments can show up in calendars of linked Evolution or Outlook clients. GLPI could allow the sending of emails via webmail, using the contacts from the GLPI database.

I am not too familiar with the complexity of this kind of thing, but thought I would throw it up as a suggestion anyways.

Cya round
Jinx

cyberbillp · 2006-06-06 23:11:25

Just to continue with the wish list.............

GLPI is great at showing you what software is INSTALLED, but there is no way to flag what software is AUTHORIZED.

In an Enterprise environment, where IT is constantly battling to keep the Infrastructure under control, Authorized software lists and unauthorized software install reports is a BIG thing.

Maybe I've just not got my head around the license management scheme yet. But it'd be awesome if there were either a dropdown we could configure and sort on or an "Authorized" field.

slack · 2006-06-07 01:44:26

That's a good idea! If GLPI's software import from OCS gets more reliable as well then an "unauthorized software" report could be generated. That would be very helpful. No matter how much you lock machines down people always seem to find ways to install garbage.

MoYo · 2006-06-07 08:25:47

You could mark as UNAUTHORIZED softwares in the OCS dicts and you will find easily them in GLPI.

cyberbillp · 2006-06-08 17:19:57

Hmmm. I'll try to figure that out.

How my use of OCS and GLPI is working out, seems to be mostly GLPI is used for Management, and OCS is for gathering raw data. I rather hate to manipulate data in OCS to get results in GLPI. Maybe that really is the best way though. Thanks for the response.

MoYo · 2006-06-08 17:56:03

in OCS you must to manage your softwares in the dictionnary to say to LGPI how to import softwares.

YinYang · 2006-06-08 19:52:00

I have to vote on slack wish about internal and external device management... I'll try to develop the same structure of external device to the internal and after that send to the developers.

YinYang · 2006-06-08 19:57:04

Another point, but on the same subject ... Programs have license management, but OS don't.

Either global license, single or free ... no way to control that the same way one controls for example mathematica or office.

Would the problem resolution be by replicating the structure of programs to the OS ?

MoYo · 2006-06-08 21:09:57

In GLPI, if you want to manage OS licenses you need to used softwares.
An OS is a software.

YinYang · 2006-06-16 10:30:36

In that case why not include some field to Software to define if that software is a OS, and then include that on the OS Pulldown.

I think on this case, besides being missledding it duplicates information, therefore any update needs to be done in 2 places.

MoYo · 2006-06-16 11:16:44

It is an historical problem yet.
This field exists since a long time. And modify its meaning may cause problem on updates...
There are lots of "small problems" on software / licenses / OS. A global thinking must be done on that.

YinYang · 2006-06-19 17:09:25

If any help is need please just say.

Forum GLPI-Project

Announcement

#1 2006-05-04 02:41:18

More feature requests

#2 2006-05-04 08:52:31

Re: More feature requests

#3 2006-05-17 07:38:15

Re: More feature requests

#4 2006-05-24 08:06:05

Re: More feature requests

#5 2006-05-25 00:31:30

Re: More feature requests

#6 2006-05-26 00:21:15

Re: More feature requests

#7 2006-05-26 20:04:35

Re: More feature requests

#8 2006-05-26 20:16:49

Re: More feature requests

#9 2006-05-26 21:55:13

Re: More feature requests

#10 2006-05-29 04:17:17

Re: More feature requests

#11 2006-05-30 23:34:16

Re: More feature requests

#12 2006-05-31 00:34:29

Re: More feature requests

#13 2006-06-06 23:11:25

Re: More feature requests

#14 2006-06-07 01:44:26

Re: More feature requests

#15 2006-06-07 08:25:47

Re: More feature requests

#16 2006-06-08 17:19:57

Re: More feature requests

#17 2006-06-08 17:56:03

Re: More feature requests

#18 2006-06-08 19:52:00

Re: More feature requests

#19 2006-06-08 19:57:04

Re: More feature requests

#20 2006-06-08 21:09:57

Re: More feature requests

#21 2006-06-16 10:30:36

Re: More feature requests

#22 2006-06-16 11:16:44

Re: More feature requests

#23 2006-06-19 17:09:25

Re: More feature requests

Board footer