questions about automation implementation

Question

Hi guys, can you help me a little with the logic or structure of an automation rule that meets the following requirements:

- When creating a story, 7 subtasks must be created.
- Each of these subtasks must have the start date (custom field) and due date (native field) fields among their fields. (This is already done.)
- The start date field must be a non-editable field.
- The due date of subtask 1 must be the start date of subtask 2, and so on until the last subtask.

Example: If the due date of subtask 1 is 01/08/25, that same date must be the start date of subtask 2. If subtask 2 has a due date of 07/08/25, that date must be the start date of subtask 3, and so on in that order.

- If the customer changes the due date of a subtask, the start date of the next subtask is updated.

Example: Taking the previous example as a reference, where the due date for subtask 1 is 01/08/25 and the start date for subtask 2 takes the same value, if the client decides to change and extend the due date for subtask 1 by one week to 08/08/25, the start date for subtask 2 would be updated to this new value.

Trudy P Claspill · Answer

Hola @Angel Salazar ,

Respecto al error que recibes en tu primera regla:

"Hemos encontrado varios campos con el mismo nombre y tipo".

Esto indica que hay más de un campo llamado "Fecha de inicio" en tu instancia de Jira, y la regla no especifica cuál intentas usar. Al hacer clic en el botón "Elegir campos para configurar" en la acción "Editar", ¿apareció más de un campo llamado "Fecha de inicio"?

Lamentablemente, tu escenario no cumple con los requisitos de mi artículo, específicamente:

3. Esta solución se basa en el uso de la función nativa de vinculación de incidencias de Jira, donde el tipo de enlace utilizado tiene valores diferentes para la descripción externa y la interna.

Como tu escenario no cumple con este requisito, la solución de mi artículo no te funcionará.

Y la segunda regla que creaste no coincide exactamente con lo que documenté en mi artículo, ya que la de mi artículo usa una rama para incidencias vinculadas, mientras que la tuya intenta usar una rama para subtareas. La rama para subtareas no funcionará en la regla que creaste. Una rama para subtareas intentará iterar sobre las subtareas de la incidencia desencadenante. Dado que la incidencia desencadenante es en sí misma una subtarea, no puede tener subtareas secundarias.

Si va a confiar en el Resumen de la Subtarea para indicar el orden de las Subtareas, necesitará una estructura diferente para su regla a la que presenté en mi artículo.

---

Hello,

Regarding the error you're getting in your first rule:

"We have found several fields with the same name and type"

That indicates that there is more than one field named "Start date" in your Jira instance, and the rule is not clear about which one you are trying to use. When you clicked on the "Choose fields to set" button in the Edit action, did it list more than one field named "Start date"?

Unfortunately your scenario does not align with the requirements in my article, specifically:

3. This solution does rely on the use of the native Issue Linking feature of Jira where the link type used has different values for Outward Description and Inward Description.

Because your scenario does not meet that requirement, the solution from my article will not work for you.

And the second rule you created is not an exact match for what I documented in my article, because the one in my article uses a branch for Linked Issues, while yours is trying to use a branch for Subtasks. The branch for Subtasks will not work in the rule you created. A branch for Subtasks will try to iterate over the Subtasks of the trigger issue. Since the trigger issue is itself a Subtask it cannot have child Subtasks.

If you are going to rely on the Summary of the Subtask to indicate the order of the Subtasks, you would need a different structure for your rule than what I presented in my article.

Hi @Bill Sheboy @Trudy Claspill, Community Champion, what I've done so far is the following in a test instance:

Create a first rule so that when an issue is created and the issue type is "story," it creates three subtasks. Then I created a branch for subtasks that, based on the summary of each subtask, would edit the due date and start date fields.

These values were suggested to me by Atlassian Rovo's AI. It suggested that, starting with subtask 2, I use the {{createdIssues.get(0).dueDate}} statement as the start date to return the due date of the previous subtask, and the {{createdIssues.get(0).dueDate.plusDays(7)}} statement as the due date. For subsequent subtasks, it would be the same, but would increase the value of the "get" number.

Here's the error I got:

I also created a second rule that is identical to the one suggested by @Trudy Claspill, Community Champion in her article that when the due dates of a subtask change, the start dates of the dependent subtasks should be updated with the new value, but nothing happens in their audit logs.

Bill Sheboy · Answer

Please carefully re-read what I posted and Trudy's article...

Trudy's article describes a scenario where a chain of work items are linked as "Blocked".  And so as one work item's dates are changed, the dependent one is updated.

The rule you show is not identical to that case: instead you are branching over all of the subtasks.  This is the case I noted would not work: either creating items as new or branching on the links is required.

As for that bot / AI-generated suggestion, it cannot work: it would require having the if / else condition block inside of branches, and that is not possible with automation rules.

Angel Salazar_rf4897 · Answer

Hola @Bill Sheboy  @Trudy P Claspill , Campeona de la comunidad lo que he hecho hasta el momento es lo siguiente en una instancia de prueba:

Crear primera regla que cuando se cree una incidencia y el tipo de incidencia es "historia" cree 3 sub tareas. Luego hice una rama para subtareas que en base al resumen de cada subtarea editara los campos fecha de vencimiento y fecha de inicio.

Estos valores me los sugirió la IA  de Atllasian Rovo. Me sugirió que a partir de la sub tarea 2 como fecha de inicio utilizara la sentencia {{createdIssues.get(0).dueDate}} para devolverme la fecha de vencimiento de la subtarea anterior  y la sentencia {{createdIssues.get(0).dueDate.plusDays(7)}} en fecha de vencimiento y para las siguientes sub tareas sería lo mismo pero incrementaría el valor del numero del "get".

Les muestro el error que me dió:

Creé también una segunda regla que es idéntica a la que me sugiere @Trudy Claspill, Campeona de la comunidad en su artículo que cuando cambien las fechas de vencimiento de una sub tarea actualicen las fechas de inicio de las sub tareas dependientes con el nuevo valor pero no ocurre nada en sus registros de auditoria