Can't enter a 'Parent Issue' when moving a task to a new Epic

Jeff Johnson_htnj7g

I pick my User Story, and try to 'Move' it.

The "Parent Issue" field allows me to type a string in there, and it indeed shows me the task I want to re-parent to.

However, it doesn't let me select it, and fill in the field. I click many many times on the option it gives me, but it doesn't let me pick it. 

If I click 'Select issue', it only gives me the last 4 issues I looked at, and doesn't let me enter anything else.

... maddening... 

 

 

Earl McCutcheon

Hello @Jeff Johnson ,

I would be happy to take a look at what is going on here but I will need a bit of clarification on the configurations to make sure I understand fully as there are several posibilites to look at as the outcome here depend on multiple factors and several overlapping features that might be al play.

First can you grab a screenshot so I can see what you are looking at for a visual aid.

Then I'll take a guess at a few possibilities below. 

From your description of the fields naming and behavior it sounds like these are most likely a custom fields added either manually with some additional logic using automation rules or added in by an add-on app, as natively in Jira there is not a Field by the name of "Parent issue" directly and when changing a parent of a standard issue type this is done via the Epic Link not a parent field. 

So first question would be;  Is the field you are looking at called "Parent Issue" or is it the "Parent Link" field that you are looking at?

If the field is called "Parent Link" this field is part of Advanced Roadmaps (Formerly called Jira Portfolio), and is designed to map a Epic to an initiative or an initiative to a higher level initiative, and would not allow a standard issue type to select a value for this field, and should display the warning "To Set an Epic as the parent, use the Epic link instead" ,  and as noted in the warning you would want to map the issue via the Epic link field instead of the parent field

With the defined hierarchy being:

• initiative 1
  • initiative 2
    • Epic
      • Story
        • Sub-Task

If the field is called "Parent Issue" It is either a custom field or has been added by an add-on to extend the native functionality,  check the field configurations in this case and let me know what the field type is and if the description notes an add-on related to the field such as "Field was created by X add-on",  possibility would be that the Parent issue field is possibly a custom field that is simply pulling a value from the Epic Link when the epic link is changed?

Additionally for native behavior the parent issue will be displayed at the top of the issue view in the element called the Breadcrumbs, that allow you to navigate up to the next level, but changing a parent would be done By setting the "Epic Link" rather than the "Parent Issue" field

With an additional caveat, Is this a Next-gen project or a classic project?

then the Next Gen Breadcrumbs and new issue view Breadcrumbs have some additional mapings options to look at.  Next gen and classic issues using the  New issue view will be set up like this

Classic with the New Issue view Disabled will look like this:

Additionally for the previously mentioned extra feature in Next Gen as awell as an additional option in the new issue view for Classic it has something that sounds possibly related which is a "Change Parent" option (Both Classic and next-gen for mapping between sub task and story) OR "Change Epic" (currently only in  Next Gen for mapping to the epic from the story, classic still maps via the epic link field) option in the breadcrumbs that looks like the following,  but you noted a Story to epic mapping so the naming convention sounds off again as parent is mentioned for a sub task to story mapping:

So what I am wondering her is if you are looking at this feature are you possibly looking at a issue type called story but is actually a sub-task issue type?  Check the issue type configurations to look verify if the issue type is possibility the incorrect hierarchy.

But please do let me know if any of this info applies or if its something else entirely.

Regards,
Earl