Please let me know how to add Button for adding client next to Client Mnemonics.

I need to add bulk client lists in the Elog page there are 1000+ clients  .

I need to select client from the drop down list if its not there i need to add them using Add Client Button 

Please let me know the steps.

Hi Stefan 

Thanks for Response , It helped me lot .

is it possible to give refence to include 1000 clients in one file and adding that referece file to Roptions ?

Once we click Client Mnemonic it should fetch the data from that file and return  the Client Name .

Can conditional attributes be assigned as conditions?

Arbitraty Example:

Attributes = Operating system, Version, Name
Options Opperating system = Linux {1}, Windows {2}
{1} Options Version = 2.2 {a}, 2.4 {b}, 2.6 {c}
{2} Options Version = ME {d}, 2k {e}, NT {f}, XP {g}
{1&a} Options Name = This computer
{1&b} Options Name = That Computer
{2&f} Options Name = Workstation

and so on..?

We use elog for (amongst other things) a simple change management log.  About two dozen users allowed to do updates and their email addresses are listed at the bottom of the page to allow any of them to be included on circulation for a change request.  The email addresses appear in the order that they were added (i.e. apparently random).  Is there any way to sort these, ideally by Last part of Full Name/First part of Full Name, but login name or email address would be OK?

Thanks for a great piece of software.

Steve

Hi

Thanks for elog - it's a brilliant piece of software.  I'd looked all over for open source software to log/manage change requests before discovering elog; it's so flexible that I've been able to do everything I need with it.

However, I think that I've just discovered my first undocumented 'feature'.  Attribute names containing punctuation characters (e.g. / and :) cause "Redirection limit for this URL exceeded" errors in Firefox 3.0.2 and corrupt the URL if they're used in a Quick Filter.  I often use '/' in attribute names for brevity, e.g. "Old/New Versions" but hadn't used one in a Quick Filter before.

keep up the good work.

regards

Steve

Hi

I've just upgraded to 2.7.5 mainly because I wanted to have Museremail sorted.  We use this to list contacts on an RFC form and it's much easier to find the ones you want when they are in a predictable sequence.  As an extension to this it would be great if they could be sorted by the last part of their real name - typical user, give him a sweetie and he wants jam on it!

cheers

Steve

Ritt, Stefan

Doe, John

 Good point! However, the current sorting appears to be done on email address rather than name.  Having the option to sort on name, where we are in control of the format so could structure it accordingly, would be great.

regards

Steve

Ritt, Stefan

Doe, John

We currently have 24 users set up which, using a normal font size, takes 6 lines to display Museremail.  Having realname+emailaddress would double the space - a bit much for us but may suit other users. 

You ask about how our email addresses look.  These are very simple, e.g. John Smith's email address would be "JohnSmith@mycompany.co.uk".  The are some exceptions, e.g. one or two people have a middle initial,or have a department name as a suffix and some people have abbreviated names because that is how they are known, so John's brother Joseph, known as Joe, might be JoeSoap@mycompany.co.uk and one or two users have a different domain.  So the ordering looks a bit odd sometimes, e.g.:

* StanleySmith@mycompany.co.uk * StellaEvans@mycompany.co.uk * StephenJones@mycompany.co.uk * StephenSmith@myothercompany.co.uk

* SterlingGold@mycompany.co.uk * SteuartEvans@mycompany.co.uk  * SteveSmythe@mycompany.co.uk * SylviaJones@mycompany.co.uk ...

where Steve Smythe has shifted down the ranks because of the abbreviation. 

However, the main reason for the request was that the I was so pleased with the ordering introduced in 2.7.5 but, as it is more normal for me  to look down a list of names ordered by last-name/first-name than the other way about, I thought it worth asking if there was any way to do this sensibly.  I appreciate that it isn't simple and what suits me may well not suit others - so thanks for taking time to consider the possibilities.  I guess the only real solution is to define users differently, e.g. by structuring the name data into first name(s) and last name (not a global solution but would suit most of western europe and the USA at least!) but that is bound to have lots of impacts both on the application and on existing setups - so not really feasible, and probably not worth the disruption.

regards

Steve