Bill Sheboy Expert

Hi @Manipal Reddy -- Welcome to the Atlassian Community! Your rule is close to what you need, although I expect it is currently adding the label to the child issues, and not the epic. You could modify your rule slightly to use the Lookup Issues action to identify the child issues which are open, and then add the label. For…

Hi @Wendy Cotter Several of the epic fields have been sunsetting for many months now, including the Epic Name. The expectation is to now use the Summary. To learn more about those changes, please look…

Hi @Jenifer Kuntz and @Haddon Fisher I believe the accountId attribute is available for team-managed project, People fields...and so it is most likely then available for JPD. Setting the value may require using advanced edit with JSON, as described here:…

Hi @Devender Singh As @Tim C noted, you were trying to use the {{lookupIssues}} smart value and the Lookup Issues action is not available for your version of Jira Server. Two other possible work-arounds for your scenario are: * Create JQL to gather the issues needed, and call a REST API function with the JQL to search for…

Hi @Prasun Parijat If you are creating that Confluence page with a rule, why not identify and send the URL at the time it is created? I recall the Create Confluence Page action does not return the URL, and instead it must be found using a REST API call from the rule, using the identifying information from the create.…

Hi @Serena Dickson I suspect your second use of Lookup Issues returned no issues due to a problem in your advanced branch. Would you please post an image of your advanced branch? Kind regards, Bill

Hi @Yatish Madhav -- Posting the same thing in four different threads may not be helpful. Instead I was suggesting to create your own question, with the Ask the community link at the top of the community pages. As you have already asked multiple times, I suggest: * pick one of those locations * delete the other posts * and…

Hi @VND Jain, Eti Adding to Nic's ideas about using the built-in Sprint Report... It is difficult to accurately detect removal of issues from a sprint using an automation rule. It is better to use what Jira has already calculated for your team with the Sprint…

Hi @Stefan Draber I believe what you describe about the order-processing of issues for the trigger is not possible. Automation rules which process multiple things (from triggers or branches) do so in parallel and asynchronously. There is no way to count, in order, using those methods. There is complicated work-around using…

Hi @Pavel Kovařík What version of Jira are you using: Cloud, Server, or Data Center? And if using Jira Server, what version of automation rules do you have: Lite (free), or Pro (paid)? The different versions of automation rules have different capabilities. For example, the Advanced Compare Condition is not available for…

I recommend using the JQL results to identify the issues which should have been marked as done for an earlier sprint, or not in the sprint, or...and then correcting that situation. Otherwise the symptom will continue, as you see in your recently created sprints.

Thanks for confirming the field, and that is unfortunate about the Data Center implementation of Lookup Issues. (Originally, the Jira Cloud version also only supported a few fields...and the rest were added about a year later.) Depending upon how you want to use that field sum, you have 2 possible work-arounds at this…

Please do not add spaces around the field names and the curly brackets, as that may lead to syntax errors. Use this {{totalSubIssues}} and not this {{ totalSubIssues }} Next thing: your rule appears to be processing multiple issues, based on the audit log. I wonder if you are misunderstanding how variables work in that…

From the log you can see the parent field is empty for that issue, DBTS-60. Was that expected to you? I suspect your rule will need different processing for Initiative versus Milestones to do what you wanted, as only one of those issue types will have the parent field set.

What is the type of your field customfield_10240: text, numeric, etc.? That will impact the expression, such as if the asNumber conversion is needed.

I am getting confused as to what is the source and the search criteria for your scenario, as you appear to be noting multiple different fields. Would you please post images of: * your current, complete automation rule in one image * images of each action / condition / branch details * an image of the audit log details…

You could then add an advanced compare condition after the lookup issues action, and only proceed if issues are found: * first value: {{lookupIssues.size|0}} * condition: greater than * second value: 0

I'm catching up on your posts/questions...even though it appears you have solved this one :^) Variable usage: When you assign a web response to a variable, it becomes text and loses all object typing...including being an array or list. The work-around is to use split() later to convert back to a list. A different approach,…

Awesome, and well done! That is a good tool to add to the box; converting the value type, in place, before applying a list function.

Hi @Greg McNamara -- Welcome to the Atlassian Community! I recall doing this a while ago, however I cannot find my example rule. The trick was the returned web response was an array, not a list, and so needed to be parsed first into a field (or variable) for handling. Please see this earlier community post which covers…

You could use an automation rule to send to a single distribution list... Or, you could create the saved filter, subscribe yourself, and then set up an email rule (in your email application) to automatically forward to the distribution list. I suggest picking one approach, trying it, and observing what happens. Although if…

Hi @Lauren McMahon Adding to Tom's answer: If you post images of your complete rule, the relevant actions, and the audit log details showing the rule execution, it may be easier for the community to diagnose what is happening. Thanks! Kind regards, Bill

In that case, you could just create a saved filter which returns all of the relevant issues, share it will people, and they can subscribe to receive the list when they wish (on a schedule).

Hi @Martin Kropp Adding to Trudy's answer... One way to do that is to get the metadata for the issue types in the specific project, confirming you have the correct id for the subtask type. That is described here for the v3 of Create…

Hi, Jack! That would work, although I believe the idea was to have the issue import drive the updates automagically...without the manual actions.

Thanks for those additional details. I do not see any handling for the relationship between the issues (which I thought used links and/or the "parent link" fields for your version) in the rule, so I am assuming you are handling that all with the parent field. Let's try this: immediately after the trigger, add a Log action…

Even less than a second difference could cause a problem for the rule, so the trigger change will help.

Yup, we see two different entries as the link happens separately. For the created issue, if you hover over the values in the issue history for created versus linked, how much time difference do you see? UPDATE: I just tried this for an on-line (not imported) issue create and even that one shows two different history…

Hi @Luke I agree. With team-managed projects (unlike company-managed projects) a status is not mapped to the backlog. Instead the backlog is either enabled or disabled. And so anyone can change the status of an item in the backlog to...well...anything. Here is a suggestion to add the ability to map a status to the backlog…

Hi @AgileHappyLearner You only show the top of the sprint report, including the chart and the completed count. What else is on that report? Based on the apparent velocity report, there appear to be a significant number of issues which are in the sprint and which are never completed. Possibly carried over from earlier…