Why does the default workflow require "close issues" and "resolve issues" permissions to close an issue?

Question

The conditions on the transition for "Close Issue" require users to have both "Close Issues" and "Resolve Issues" permissions.  This is not necessarily how we would like to operate, so I would like to reduce this to just the "Close Issues" permission.  I hesitate, however, since there may have been a good reason for this condition in the first place.

Can someone clarify how requiring both of these permissions to close an issue might be necessary?

Nic Brough -Adaptavist- · Answer

Yes, that's why I'd ask Atlassian what was going on when they decided to do it this way.

An artefact of their design may kick in here - you also need "resolve" permission to be able to set a fix-version, so granting just "close" on it might not be enough if your project is using versions.

seanadams · Answer

Thanks Nic.  The way I understand the default workflow, a developer completes their work and moves the issue to RESOLVED.  Then someone verifies the work and moves the issue to CLOSED.  That all makes sense and seems like a logical way to operate.

But that doesn't answer why moving an issue to CLOSED would require both the "Resolve Issue" and "Close Issue" permissions.

Nic Brough -Adaptavist- · Answer

To answer the "why" accurately, you'll need to talk to Atlassian.  It sort of makes sense to me - the "resolve" permission means "person can say we're done with it, pending validation", which you wouldn't generally allow to the person who raised it (bang goes the sprint/estimate if someone outside your team resolves something without warning!).  Close means "it's dead, don't care", which you may well want to grant to users and developers.  Hence a double condition that forces the user to be able to do both.  Bit of a terrible explanation, as I don't know what quite they were thinking there.

However, as it doesn't match what you need, there is absolutely no harm in changing it.  You'll need to copy the workflow, edit it, add it to a new scheme and apply it, but there's no reason not to (you need to do that because you can't edit the default)