Sam Harding Atlassian Team

Hi @James Paniagua , Looking at the rule you have set up there, it seems that you are branching on `{{attachment}}`, and creating a variable `{{AttachmentItem}}` for your branches. However, the log action is referencing the original `{{attachment}}` and not the `{{AttachmentItem}}`. Can you try changing the actions in the…

Hi @Bill Sheboy Addressing your older comments regarding the use of custom variables as parameters, there is a bug around the type resolution of custom variables when used as params which causes broken functionality. I have raised a ticket here https://codebarrel.atlassian.net/browse/AUT-2430 As for the second question…

Hi @Edward Webb One way to do what you are describing is to use a combination of the webhook body's smart value, and the Branch Component `Branch rule / related entities`. The branching would essentially be a functional replacement for the 'lookupPage' concept. In the sending of the webhook from Jira, you could include a…

Hi @ryan The other commenters here have left great suggestions which you can explore. One other method is to use the smart value `{{issue.issuelinks}}`. This provides a list of the issue links on an issue you can use in smart values. For example, the smart value `{{#issue.issuelinks}}{{type.name}} -…

Hi there @nish Sorry for delay in looking into this. Looking at the response body, it seems that the issue is not so much not being able to locate the url/server, but that the request is being denied due to not being authorised (hence the 403 response code). I am not sure what hosting infrastructure you have set up to…

Hi @Grzegorz Ostrowski From your solution you've posted above, it seems like the webhook body is being read in as a string, and not the dictionary/map structure. Is it possible to check whether the webhook sender is encapsulating the data inside a string when it sends the webhook?

No worries @Mykenna Cepek, I've added a link back to this post/thread in that ticket. If you guys have any further thoughts on the matter, we'd love to hear it too! Cheers Sam

Hi @Mykenna Cepek You've hit the nail on the head, what you're describing is exactly one of issues we are tackling with the feature changes involved for the component. The Create Variable feature does in fact have the concept of 'point-of-evaluation', where it in fact can lazily evaluate smart value only when it is…

Hi @Dirk Ronsmans If you look up the issues using the rest api `/rest/api/3/issue/<ISSUE_KEY>`, can you see the field/value in question? It may be under a `customfield_....` entry. If so, then you will be able to access that information in your automation rules, using that custom fields id, as {{issue.customfield_.....}}…

Hi all, This thread has some great discussion around the feature, thanks @Bill Sheboy for the guidance you've provided around its usage. A note on the issue you pointed out around variables not working as parameters to functions, we recently release a fix for this, so you should now be able to use the variables as you…

@Curt Holley it should be able to get custom date fields. Can you verify the smart values {{issue}} and {{issue.customfield_10298}} to see whether the smart value structure is correct? I am not sure that the 'issue' part of that is correct in the context of using a lookupIssues smart value. I would expect the smart value…

@Bill Sheboy It does! Just closed it out Cheers Sam

Hi @Georgi Rizov There might be some way, depending on what pipelines/logic you are wanting to trigger on, to do this using a DevOps trigger. However, there definitely is a way using the Incoming Webhook trigger Assuming the issue key in question for the example is RWP-343, and you are wanting to populate your…

Hi @Warda Basta There is a way to do this using smart values. You can filter out the labels on the parent, using the endsWith() function, and set that list on the issue using the More Options Advanced Field Editing The text being used here in the Additional fields section is { "fields": { "labels": […

Hi @Bill Sheboy This change was released only for cloud. The behaviour may vary with server/data center. Cheers Sam

Hi @Julia Foden The feature did not cover issue links, but we have just rolled out an update that now allows issue to be used with the feature. Thanks for the feedback with your error information! Cheers Sam

Ah I see. No there is no way to move or change the project an issue is in. This is a limitation around what actions can be performed by the Jira API that is available to us. The work around is to clone the issue into another project. We are not currently working on providing the ability to move an issue inter-project.

On cloud, we already have these logs. These instructions are for DC/server, in order to provide the logs we would otherwise not have access to. Thanks for the clarification!

My comment about not integrating with confluence is about doing first party integrations; there currently is no component or action dedicated to creating confluence pages using internal mechanisms (such as, for example, creating an issue). You indeed can use "Send web request" to work around this.

This is the correct answer, a smart value using diff and format will do the trick: {{now.diff(issue.created).format("toHours")}}

I see! If this is what your rule is doing, then there is a way to do what you are wanting. In you 'Linked Issues' branch, you can add an Advanced Compare condition to check that '{{comment.internal}} equals true'. Then in that 'If' statements branch, put your Add Comment action, and and ensure the 'Share with customers'…

Hi @Julia Foden The answers suggested by the others in this thread are good advice, and I recommend following their suggestions. In your particular case, the reason it is not valid JSON is because of the trailing commas after your 'fields' entry. Removing the commas will make the JSON valid. Cheers Sam

Hi @Peter Johansson What you have done should work. I have just verified that multiple if statements can be done as you are trying in smart value templates. There must be some other issue at play here. Can you put a Log Action and print out value1 and value2, as well as log the double if statement result? Does your rule…

Hi @Alex Fang The consumer key is a secret passphrase you generate for your consumer. In many OAuth flow descriptions this is referred to as "Client Secret". You can set this to be whatever secret value you would like (but it is recommended to use a strong passphrase generator for this purpose). Once you have configured…

Hi @David DeLorenzo Which of those rules is the one in question? Is it the 'Copy comment between linked issues'? Can you open up that rule and share with us the configuration of the rule components? Cheers Sam

Hi @Otto Van Straaten It is possible to set worklogs on an issue using automation, by using smart values and setting the JSON values in an issues 'Additional Fields' section (see https://support.atlassian.com/jira-software-cloud/docs/advanced-field-editing-json/#field-syntax-examples for some examples of this). However, I…

Hi, I posted a possible solution to the problem in your other post https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-questions/Only-transition-a-sub-task-when-an-other-sub-task-is-done/qaq-p/1629325, which hopefully helps to diagnose why your current rule set up is not working as expected. Cheers Sam

Hi @Ryan O'Donnell The ability to sort/filter/mutate a list in smart values is something that is currently lacking in Automation for Jira. We are tracking this problem in issues such as https://codebarrel.atlassian.net/browse/AUT-1241, but at this time, sorting as list by chronological order is not something that is…

Hi @Alex Fang At this time, Automation for Jira does not provide OAuth integration out of the box. It is technically possible to set up OAuth using webhook triggers and actions, by manually performing the relevant OAuth steps (ie, fire off a web request to your OAuth provider's Authorization end point, with the redirect…

Hi @David DeLorenzo Can you share your rule configuration here so we can get a better picture of how your rule is set up? If I am understanding your scenario correctly, you are wanting to set the visibility of a comment being generated by your rule, based on the visibility/locked status of a triggering comment.…