Why re-name automation rules to flows?

[Koloman Pfeffer]

I really don't understand, why this change was made - so it's even more difficult for users to know, where they can find which feature? So that users even more often mistake workflows with automation flows which already happened before? Or is it to again have tons of documentation where the wording wasn't updated so you now have two key words to search for, if you need a solution?

I get naming changes to unify naming schemes across products, but here it really seems like it's purely a marketing decision, not catering to user need at all.

On top of it all, it would have been great to actually notify users and admins before such a change was made. Now that the automatic notifications about new features don't work anymore, it would have been at least common courtesy to proactively notify admins a few weeks in advance.

[Aron Gombas _Midori_]

While I am huge fan of using the right term everywhere and consistently, I don't support this rename.

Particularly because "flows" and "workflows" are now uncomfortably close in terminology within Jira.

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Koloman Pfeffer 

The first notification I saw about this rebranding of rules was in the weekly release blog on 20 April...with a questionable explanation of the "why do this".  There was also a note about renaming rule Components to Steps.

https://confluence.atlassian.com/cloud/blog/2026/04/atlassian-cloud-changes-apr-13-to-apr-20-2026

Kind regards,
Bill

[Koloman Pfeffer]

Thanks, I found it later, but there seems to be a bug in the weekly release blog updates as none of our admins receives the emails anymore. Also the blog updates don't seem to be released on Tuesdays anymore.

But yes, the explanation in my opinion is more than questionable and feels very much like a marketing decision actual users won't like.