nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

My automation rule can not change the status of selective issues

Bruce Azarm

Hi Guys,

I've made an automation rule to change the status of the issues that have been in waiting status for more than two weeks to be resolved. It seems the condition which I've defined to cover this request is not working properly:

issue.updated < -14

Any help, in this case, is highly appreciated.

Regards

Bruce

Accepted answers

All comments

elenushhh

@Bruce Azarm Hello,

You should verify if there is a transition available from status waiting to resolved.

I`m not sure if this helps, but I had an issue like this and this helped me.

Let me know if it works, or if I can help you more.

Good luck,

Elena.

Bill Sheboy

Hi @Bruce Azarm

Please consider posting an image of your rule to help the community provide input.

Also, when you check the audit log for the rule, what does it indicate: success, errors, etc.?

Best regards,

Bill

Bruce Azarm

Hi Bill,

Thanks for your reply. I have attached your requested images which hopefully could be helpful for your consideration. Thanks, Bruce

Bill Sheboy

Thanks, Bruce!

I appears the rule did what you asked, and that some issues fell off after the first condition (assignee test) and others fell off after the second condition (update test). Which of these results are unexpected?

Given your original question, I wonder if you should be checking status rather than updated, as updated can change for various reasons. For example, you should be able to create a single JQL to find these and validate what you expect to change.

project = "IE Internal Support"
 AND status = "waiting"
 AND (assignee NOT IN (yourlist) OR assignee IS EMPTY)
 AND NOT status CHANGED AFTER -14d

Two more notes on things to consider:

Please consider the possibility of EMPTY for assignee, not just absent from your list of people
You are doing this to move items to a Resolved status after a period of time. If this is the equivalent of abandoning them, you may want to also add a comment explaining why or add a custom field to indicate Abandoned. That will make finding issues changed by the rule easier in the future, as needed.

Bruce Azarm

Thanks, Bill,

Logically two conditional statements are doing great and seem to work, but the problem is there're some issues filtered in the second condition ( have not been updated for 2 weeks or more) but their status has not changed to "resolved" and the notification comment has not been updated in the issues.

In fact, the execution part of this rule could not operate properly after selecting all the required issues in our conditional statements ( Assignee and Update).

Kind regards

Bruce

Bruce Azarm

Hi elenushhh,

Thanks for your reply,

Yes, we can change the issue status form waiting to resolved.

Regards

Bruce

Bill Sheboy

Interesting... Please try to run the stand-alone JQL I provided to see if you get the expected results. If not, perhaps the conditions do not match what you expect for the current conditions of those issues that you want to update.

Thanks!

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

cloud

jira-software