[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Gordon Henderson wrote: > I've installed both, however not for a couple of years. RT was the worst > to install - maybe it's improved now, but it relied on some weird perl > frameworf.... Not used either seriously though - this was for other > people, but was thinking about it recently myself... It uses HTML::Mason, which was quite advanced for its day, I guess, long before all this new-fangled MVC stuff became all the rage. It looks a bit long in the tooth now, perhaps, and seems to have reached the "bugfix only" stage of development, but it does the job as far as RT is concerned. It does rely on a pile of perl modules being installed, but they're not too hard to find packages for, or there's a script that will sort it all out for you. >> Sugar really is everything in one place and it has an excellent >> installation interface. > > Now that's intersting. I was speaking to a chap today who sells solutions > based on Sugar too... Sugar is very impressive. I set it up recently for a client who was looking at the Microsoft CRM stuff and they're pretty pleased with it, especially when I managed to suck all of the data from their previous (and somewhat ropey) system and import it into Sugar. I'd say it's a bit overkill for just doing ticketing though. James -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html