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; } } }

Automation: If multi-user picker field A= multi-user picker field B, then edit

Stewart_ Emily _ Global D_T

Hello,

I'm trying to setup an automation rule so that when a custom field UC Approved By (cf[12959]) is edited, if UC Approver (cf[12858] multi-user picker field) values equals UC Approved By (cf[12959] multi-user picker field) values, then edit UC Approved and UC Status. However, the automation rule keeps throwing an error: "IF or ELSE: Add condition options"..."Unexpected error while executing rule."

I've tried using the customfield_id and custom field name. I've tried quite a few things and sadly lost many hours before finally reaching out for help. TIA!

Accepted answers

Bill Sheboy

Hi @Stewart_ Emily _ Global D_T

There is no automation list sort function, although there is an open suggestion to add that function.

For your scenario:

GIVEN an issue with multiple-select, user picker custom fields: "UC Approved By" and "UC Approver"
WHEN "UC Approved By" changes
AND the selected values in both fields match
THEN edit custom fields UC Approved and UC Status

One possible workaround is to use dynamic regular expressions to compare the values after removing any matches, testing in both directions (to avoid any subsets for one field in the other).

Kind regards,
Bill

All comments

Varsha Joshi

I would create a email component before your if statements to see what values are being returned, that might help you debug it.

Bill Sheboy

Hi @Stewart_ Emily _ Global D_T

There is no automation list sort function, although there is an open suggestion to add that function.

For your scenario:

One possible workaround is to use dynamic regular expressions to compare the values after removing any matches, testing in both directions (to avoid any subsets for one field in the other).

Kind regards,
Bill

Stewart_ Emily _ Global D_T

Thanks, Bill. I think you overestimate my abilities and would greatly appreciate more information about your suggested workaround. I modified the rule to put the condition on the WHEN and removed the sort, join, etc. part of each smart value, but I'm still getting the same error.

Bill Sheboy

No worries, as we all are learning...especially as automation rules features evolve :^)

I did a quick test, and found that behind the scenes, Jira appears to return the users in a multiple-selection user field in ascending order by account ID to an automation rule. If that is reliable, the condition you show should work.

I wonder if the problem is using the condition in the trigger...as that new feature has been shown to have problems with timing (i.e., how fast the rule gets the data).

Let's try this version of the rule, adding some writes to the audit log to confirm the behavior is as expected:

trigger: field value changes for UC Approved By
action: log, to write the first field to the log

UC Approved By: {{issue.customfield_12959.accountId}}

action: log, to write the second field to the log

UC Approver : {{issue.customfield_12858.accountId}}

smart values condition:
- first value: {{issue.customfield_12959.accountId}}
- condition: equals
- second value: {{issue.customfield_12858.accountId}}
action: edit work item fields, to update UC Approved, and UC Status

Please try that rule, reviewing the audit log to confirm the values have what you expected.

Stewart_ Emily _ Global D_T

Hooray! I reconfigured the rule as you suggested, confirmed the two logs matched, and still got the error; however, then I removed the branch before the last If-Then duo, and it worked. Thank you so much!

Welcome!

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

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

jira

cloud

jira-cloud