[feature request] Additional text field in task updates visible to staff only

[massey21]

Hi, it would help our equipment staff if there were a second text field available when updating a task to add information visible to staff only.

This sounds somewhat similar to Issue #140, but it's actually different in some significant ways.

Motivation and example: Equipment staff would often like to record details on task updates that they don't want to be visible to users. For example, an update visible to users might read, "To fix this problem, we entered service mode to reset the controller." The additional information visible to staff only might read, "To enter service mode, hold Shift+F7 and enter password [svcmodepwd]." This serves to consolidate all info within the NEMO task to aid staff in replicating the fix next time this issue occurs, while also keeping the know-how to enter service mode among staff only.

Suggested implementation: Add a second text box below this text box at the bottom.

Text entered into this second text box appears only for staff (perhaps in a different text color), immediately following the text visible to all users. Here's an example of what this could look like, where the red text is only visible to staff and admins.

Thank you for considering this feature!

[rptmat57]

Thanks for submitting this request.
As a workaround, staff could post a comment that is only visible to staff.
Another option would be to add the instructions to the Staff knowledge base maybe (although far from ideal since it wouldn't be linked to the tool directly)

Technically I don't think this would be very complicated, however I am not sure how the task update emails would work.
Many people, including potentially non-staff people, receive the task update emails and we probably wouldn't want to include that info in it unless we are sure that they are staff?
Also, could that field be updated? and if that's the only thing updated in the task, we would need to prevent the emails to be sent out too.

[massey21]

Thanks for the suggestions. We're still on 5.2, so I haven't tried the staff knowledge base yet. However, the team really wants this connected to the specific task, if possible.

I was hesitant include this example in my initial post, but there are cases where there are cases where it might be necessary for accurate documentation to write that an individual performing maintenance on the tool made an egregious mistake that now requires a significantly more involved fix. It needs to be documented, but the sensitive specifics don't need to be visible to the whole facility. I suggested sanitizing these types of comments, but the team convinced me through specific examples that there are cases where the unsanitized information needs to be captured.

My thoughts on how emails would work:
-- Only visible-to-all info is sent. Staff-only info is not.
-- All task updates should require updates to the visible-to-all text, meaning an email can be sent on every update

I can't dictate how others might use this, but I'm of the opinion that staff-only updates should be the rare exception, not the norm. I pushed back on our team needing hidden updates at all, but they came up with a few classes of examples where it made sense to have hidden information and managed to change my mind: service procedures they don't want users attempting, info damaging to someone's reputation, credentials or steps for service-level access, protected/controlled information (e.g., proprietary correspondence from vendors).

[rptmat57]

Alright, that makes sense.
To sum up:

1. Add a new staff only comment field to Task
2. Allow staff to update it in tool control and maintenance view
3. Don't change any of the rest of the functionality with regards to emails and progress updates
4. Display the new field in maintenance view, and in tool control view to staff only (collapsed by default, in case staff is looking at tool control with a user, similar to staff only comments)

Let me know if I missed anything

[massey21]

That all sounds correct, but for #2 I had assumed it would be updatable via the tool control page's update button as well. Thank you!

[rptmat57]

You are correct, I'll change that