Email address not always filled out

Technical assistance
1

Infos:

  • Used Zammad version: 6.3 (but also in 6.2)
  • Used Zammad installation type: Package
  • Operating system: Debian 12
  • Browser + version: Any

Expected behavior:

  • When you click on ‘reply’ on an article, a new email message is made. In the TO-field, the address of the recipient should be filled out
    (of course this only works when the original message has been sent via email)

Actual behavior:

  • For some senders, their email address is not filled out. I have to manually enter their name (Zammad’s autocomplete works fine, so I don’t have to remember their email address) in the TO-field

I have this for at least two senders. These two senders are also collegues and are also agents, but they send their email the normal way to a support-mail address. When they are clients/customers, they really act like customers as well, I suppose. Their email address is filled out properly in their Zammad-contact as well. So I don’t really see a reason why the TO-field would be empty when replying to them.
This is a new installation of Zammad. I have used Zammed for years at my previous job and had things set-up quite similarly and never experienced anything like this.

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  • Open a ticket that has been sent via email
  • Click ‘reply’ to write a reply
  • See that ‘TO’ is empty
    See screen shots below

image
image1257×974 36.9 KB

image
image1271×361 12.3 KB

3

Zammad actively tries to avoid to reply to agents and its own email addresses.
In most scenarious replying to an agent is not exactly “useful” because they (not always, but most of the time) have access to the information in Zammad already.

Especially, because you’d usually don’t want to “leak the agents email address” to a customer. Customers then tend to send to agents directly and your agents either don’t put it into Zammad or answer directly. That’s not exactly the idea you have when you implement a ticket system.

It’s usually supposed to be the single spot of communication. That may not apply to all use cases which is why you can do that manually. Maybe that view helps you.

4

Thanks for your explanation. That makes sense.
I know we are not 100% using Zammad the way it’s supposed to. I just started working at a new company that did not use a ticketing system, so the first thing I did was introduce Zammad. But some colleagues are really old fashioned and it’s been a hell of a job getting them to see Zammad is really much better than shared mailboxes in Outlook…

5

Some people need pain to learn (:
Some also will hold on to their “good ol’ times”

Nothing you can really do about it I’m afraid. It takes time and a lot of nerves.