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; } } }

Summary field required?

System Admin19

I'm trying to make a custom issue type, and I can't get rid of the summary field. I don't want it, and I there is no way to make it optional. It's annoying because EVERY OTHER FIELD i can make optional, but not the summary field, for some reason. I'm not sure what i'm doing wrong..all i know is this is ridiculously complex and shouldn't have to be this hard. i'm really hating jIRA workflows.

can anyone help me figure out where i've gone wrong? I've checked every scheme, field configuration, assignment, everything. I can't seem to make this "required" field go away! Thanks.

-J

Accepted answers

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

You are not doing anything wrong really. Summary is a mandatory system field, you can't create an issue without it. Jira is coded that way, and you can't make it go away. You have to fill it in.

The best you can do is remove it from all screens and automatically populate it using a post-function or listener, but I've got a feeling you can't do that in OnDemand - you'll still need to populate it on creation.

All comments

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

You are not doing anything wrong really. Summary is a mandatory system field, you can't create an issue without it. Jira is coded that way, and you can't make it go away. You have to fill it in.

System Admin19

Huh ok.. well at least i know it's not me. I was starting to question my sanity. Thanks.

RambanamP

You can add some default value to summary field or you can copy over any other field value

kfessler

You can't remove Summary because it's the title of the ticket! It would be more appropriately named 'Title', IMO.

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

Summary is a better word than title, it's a more generalised word than title. Title would be ok for some types of issue, but isn't really right for others in English. Bugs for example, wouldn't have a title, summary is a far better way to say it.

Alexej Geldt

I think the word Summary may be quite confusing. Most generalised term for me would be "name".

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

Again, you don't really give a "name" to a bug. In English, a name is subtly different from a title or a summary. Names are generally proper and formal. You name people, pets, places and so-on. "London" is a name, it doesn't really have a title, and a "Summary" of "A large conurbation in England" is appropriate.

My point is that summary is a very generalised word, it really does mean "a very short sentence to give a quick view of the item under discussion". Name and title are too specific in their meaning.

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

You can't do it in the standard UI. Rambanam is probably suggesting that you use Javascript to create and populate it before the user commits a new issue.

daphna tsachor

I actually don't seem to manage adding any default value or copying to it values from other feeds... am I missing something?

Jack Pond

Like the rest of the world, "Subject"?

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

What does that mean? You'd prefer Subject to Summary for the name of the field? It's not as good a word as "summary", because subject means "the person or object being discussed". But I might be discussing a principle, asking a question or requesting help. "Summary" works better for them.

Marc Wampfler

Thanks, useful explanation!

It would be nice when Atlassian would label the field as "Required by System" :-)

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

Users don't care why a field is made mandatory, so that would be pointless.

Jérôme Mignault

My brain hurts, why on Eartth you would not want this field, it is so useful.

Joshua_Woehlke

In my case I'm trying to represent repeating manufacturing batches with issues. These will occur multiple times a day, every day, and need to be moved through a complex workflow to show their current status on an assembly line.

They don't have a "summary." The UUID field and a QR code to link to the issue is more than sufficient to identify them through the whole process. They're just a batch, like the thousand before and after them, and they just need to be transitioned through the workflow. Having someone type out a summary field for them makes no sense. Do they just mash the keyboard and name it "fjwiaepoghjerw"?

Nic Brough -Adaptavist-

So why not use the UUID in the summary? That way it will always be in front of the user (your UUID is text anyway)

Joshua_Woehlke

It's a cloud instance, so I'm not seeing any way to automatically fill the summary field in order for issue creation to be possible. I'd love to use UUID as summary, but post functions only seem to be able to do that if the issue is allowed to be created in the first place, and I don't want a hack solution like type nonsense into the summary and then have it overwritten with UUID.

Welcome!

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

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

cloud

jira-cloud