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; } } }

Should we use Automation instead of Validation to Migrate Server Workflows to Jira Cloud?

Dwight Holman

During migration testing we have found

a number of workflow validations on our server instance that won't migrate to cloud (mostly rules using 3rd party apps).
implementing equivalent workflow validation rules in Jira Cloud is difficult.

Our MOVE Yoda suggested we consider implementing more complex logic via Automation instead of Workflow Validations. i.e. if the user transitions an issue but field data is not complete (or not valid), the automation rule would add a comment to the issue explaining the problem, and send the issue back to the previous status.

This approach cannot be used for Create transitions (new issues), but seems like it would be possible in other situations. However it seems a strange way to solve the issue.

Has anyone out there tried this approach?

Have your team found this UX logical/obvious?

Accepted answers

Ste Wright

Hi @Dwight Holman

I've seen these used - but I wouldn't suggest it's the best solution, it's a workaround.

I've found this can cause issues like...

Lots of comments, not related to the issue at hand (although you could send an email instead)
Create reporting issues, if you're using a status as the start for cycle time, or you count how many times an issue is in a given status, etc
Less positive user experience - and can result in user frustration, lowering adoption

I'd instead look for Apps which can extend validators from the Marketplace - such as...

...or look for other ways to meet your requirements.

If you have some specific examples of validation you need - happy to try to recommend a possible solution

Ste

All comments

Ste Wright

Hi @Dwight Holman

I've seen these used - but I wouldn't suggest it's the best solution, it's a workaround.

I've found this can cause issues like...

Lots of comments, not related to the issue at hand (although you could send an email instead)
Create reporting issues, if you're using a status as the start for cycle time, or you count how many times an issue is in a given status, etc
Less positive user experience - and can result in user frustration, lowering adoption

I'd instead look for Apps which can extend validators from the Marketplace - such as...

...or look for other ways to meet your requirements.

If you have some specific examples of validation you need - happy to try to recommend a possible solution

Ste

Dwight Holman

Thanks for the observations. Hope these are helpful for others too.

We will need apps to get what we want, but I'm yet to work through all our workflows in Cloud to figure out the details.

It looks like differences between server and cloud apps will make this more difficult.

Ste Wright

Hi @Dwight Holman

There are differences, but Apps are becoming more mature in Cloud as more teams move there.

Aside from taking the time to do the research, you could also contact App vendors and ask about specific needs, or ask for documentation comparing their Server and Cloud App functionality?

Ste

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

jira-software-cloud

workflow

automation