Soft-archiving Jira Cloud components (rename + ledger + report) — useful without picker hiding?

ruilin zhang

We have ~40 components per project, most of them obsolete, and deleting
them would destroy issue history (JRACLOUD-10507, open since 2006, 1238
votes). I built a Forge app that soft-archives components instead of
deleting them — batch rename to "[ARCHIVED] <name>", an archive ledger,
and a report with linked-issue counts.

Limitations, stated upfront: the native component picker cannot be filtered
by apps, so archived components remain visible there with the prefix; and
because this works by renaming, it won't fit teams whose external systems
integrate keyed on component names.

Question: is "rename + ledger + report" enough to be useful for your team,
or is picker visibility a deal-breaker? Happy to give free access during
the trial in exchange for feedback.

Tomislav Tobijas

Hi @ruilin zhang ,

I'd say this direction using [ARCHIVED] prefix would be a common and effective workaround. I believe we used this approach a couple of times. It's really shame JRACLOUD-10507 has soo many votes and is still 'gathering interest' 🫤

One thing that's worth noting here is that a lot of teams still reference components by their name > so we're mainly looking at API or filter breakage ⚠️

Anyway, I'd also consider adding a restore option (if you haven't already) and perhaps a warning about potential impacts on existing JQL filters, automation rules, and integrations that reference component names.

Just a small note: Since you're developing a Forge app and looking for feedback, you might also want to share this in App Central. It's a dedicated space for Marketplace and custom apps, so you might get some useful feedback from other app developers and users there. 🙂

Cheers,
Tobi