Can you setup a workflow transition to move an issue to a different workflow?
No, you can't do that.
The workflow an issue is following is tied to the issue type. So you can't change to another workflow on an issue. You CAN change the issue type, and if the target issue type has a different workflow, then the issue will follow the new workflow.
There's nothing in a workflow transition that allows you to change the issue type though. It's quite complex to code for because you have to consider all the potential incompatibilities and data migrations.
Nic,
I see this question referenced around the boards. I believe what Ben was after was the ability to have an issue or a card transition from one workflow to another separate workflow, so that the items can complete the lifecycle they are currently in.
So If I am working on a bug/issue and complete my process on it, I may be able to pass it into another workflow for another team to complete their work against it before closing it.
I see this useful if a Scrum team(s) are working in a shared QA (or team) environment. Maybe a team finishes their work, gets final sign off from the Product Owner (PO), moves it to "done", and upon that story completing there is another story that starts a lifecycle somewhere else (i.e. QA testing).
Does this make sense?
I am new to workflow in JIRA and also looking for an answer on this. I have used systems like OnBase, ImageNow, etc. that have this type of functionality.
I am still shoulder deep in reading and learning though and know this answer is quite old.
My original answer stands, and it's *Very* simple. A workflow is a process an issue follows. It's nonsense to say "another workflow" because that just tells me you've split a single process up pointlessly. Your point about the flow you have is valid, but you answer your own question. "a team finishes... moves to done... *and another story starts somewhere else*". That's not "moving to another workflow", that is "creating a new task to be done". Whether that new task follows a different process is irrelevant, it's a new piece of work. Workflows don't change. It's nonsense. Or if they do change, it's a broken workflow that does not usefully represent your real process. What you're really looking for is "as a result of X, create more items to work on". If you've got access to any coding (e.g. script-runner), then it's a doddle - create a post-function that creates a new issue when someone uses the "close" transition on the first one.
Nic, Very valid points and I'll have to remeber this trick. I have to think on this more. I am worried about creating clutter by copying the card. It would be nice if I could just have a card exist in multiple workflows within a lifecycle without having to create a new card and copy all the information to it. I'll have to read more into this.
It's a logical impossibility for something to exist in more than one workflow. Either there's a process (workflow) it is following, or it's not something that follows a process. (Actually, you can do it on a quantum object, but then you've got the massive problem that you can never know what status or workflow it is actually in, until you make a decision, and then it's in a single workflow)
It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
