Added Assignee function for events

[Limraj]

Description I would suggest adding an 'Assignee' function that would work as follows:

1. It is only available for Active events, when acknowledge is not available;
2. It has the same icon as acknowledge, but a different signature; It has the other icons, Assign icon 'user plus' and Assignee icon 'user minus';
3. An Assignee column has been added to the Pending and Search tables, displaying the username and acceptance date;
4. A given event can only be assign once, by one person;
5. When it comes to notifying the highest alarm for a given user, it would work exactly like the silence function, with the difference that every user can see it;
6. Assignee events do not disappear from the pending list;
7. If the event goes to the 'Return to normal' state, then the 'Acknoledged' function is displayed and 'Assign' disappears.

Edit:

Details

1. We made it impossible to confirm an active event;
2. A person from the community pointed out that they need a function that confirms that a given operator has received an event, it must include who and when;
3. Hence, I proposed an additional function: a) Available for active events, b) Whose purpose is to record who and when the active event was assignee, c) Behaves like a acknowledged, i.e. such an assignee event is not taken into account in the calculation highest alarm, but it does not disappear from the list of Pending events, so here it works similarly to silenced, with the difference that it is visible to all users; (Combination of acknowledged and silenced functions) d) This can be done by one user and this assignment cannot be changed; e) If the event receives the "Return to normal" status, ackonoledged appears instead of this function. Similarly, if the event has the status "No RTN".

Assign(user plus) and Assignee(user minus) for Urgent event

Specifications Scada-LTS Version: 2.6.18

[Limraj]

Hi @GabrielTec251, Will this be ok?

[Limraj]

@GabrielTec251 I'm trying to step in and do what you need, even though you don't pay me anything for it. I have already explained that this results from the arrangements with our client, so the acknowledged action will not change. The rest works as in previous versions. If this doesn't suit you, you can use older versions and everyone will be happy.

[Limraj]

@GabrielTec251 If someone doesn't want to cooperate, you can't force them, no matter what you do, nothing will come of it. There's nothing more I can do. Take care.

[GabrielTec251]

As I said, I'm sorry, it wasn't my intention; If there is any way I can contribute, I would be grateful.

[GabrielTec251]

I'm looking for a way to show how sorry I am for this inconvenience;

and I was also informed that I made some mistakes in your semantics;

for example, here we don't use "I would like" before asking for something, and that may have sounded negative;

we usually say "I want"

Maybe for linguistic or cultural reasons some of the things I said sounded really bad, but I swear I was just trying to contribute;

Once again, I am very sorry for the inconvenience

[Limraj]

@GabrielTec251 I only explained the situation, why the action in the pending list has changed, and since I can't go back to the previous 'acknoledged' behavior, I proposed other solution. As I say, if what I propose is not satisfactory enough that nothing can be done about it, then it is not necessary for us to continue with it. My attitude is only that I try to help when someone has a problem and that's all, I don't force anyone to cooperate, especially if what I can do is not useful.

[GabrielTec251]

What you proposed is useful, yes, I didn't understand it at first, when I came to understand the conversation had already unfolded, it was my mistake, you just tried to help

[GabrielTec251]

@Limraj

Could you forgive me for my mistake?

I am very grateful for your work

This solution is perfect, now that I understand it will be of great help

f it is still possible, I would like you to accept my apology and implement your solution;

or at least accept the apology, it is of great personal importance to me

[Limraj]

@GabrielTec251 I don't fully understand your reaction, I just wanted to know if we can help with your problem, I don't feel offended etc. The only problem I had was that in my opinion you were not interested in reaching an agreement, although maybe translation, but I guess that's also it is no longer relevant, as far as I am concerned, I do not feel offended, insulted, etc. in any sense.

[GabrielTec251]

he solution you propose at the beginning is perfect

; Could you implement it please?

Note: The translation changes the tone of what is said a lot, I thought I offended you and I'm relieved I didn't do that

note 2: I'm going to take an English course to improve this

[Limraj]

@GabrielTec251 We are discussing it in the team... I will let you know what the result is.