Stefan Salzl Community Champion

Hi @Glen From my point of view this would replicate functionality that a standard xray issuetype TestPlan already delivers. Opening a test plan issue provides exactly this information which test executions are in the testplan. Furthermore having processes, workflows, statuses and assignees easies finding test executions.…

Hi @Ouioui Zhou My approach would be to work with smart values: Best Stefan

hmm.....got your point and why this keeps you awake at night 🙈 Would it be sufficient if this action runs once or twice a day? The rule could then start with a JQL that checks stories. Otherwise I guess a workaround for the lookupIssue could be a webhook to JIRA API in the automation rule. Best Stefan

Oh man I feel you. This is nerve wrecking 🙈🙈🤣🤣 I‘ll give it another shot today 🙌🏼

hi @George Stamos thanks for the information. That‘s a game changer as the lookupIssue action is not available for data center 🙈 need to rethink the solution 🤔 Best Stefan

In case there is a component "Design" in the SubTasks the following rule should do the work as expected: Looking forward to your feedback. Best Stefan

Hi @George Stamos , Do the subtasks have the field "Component" filled with component "Design"? Or is color the only way the are detected as Design issues? Best Stefan

Hi @David Gan If your problem could be resolved please consider to click the Accept button in order to have this question marked as "Solved". Best Stefan

If this could solve your problem please consider to click the "Accept" button in order to have this question marked as solved.

Hi @David Backup If your problem is resolved please consider to click "Accept" in order to mark this question as solved. Best Stefan

@UI91 rest/api/2/issue/{TestExecID}/transitions - { "transition": { "Id" : "1" } } This looks very similar to my approach. Maybe the {...} encapsulated in single quotes. Best Stefan

Hi @UI91 Welcome to the community ;) I tested this and it worked well. Let´s get this working also for you. * Did you re-check your transition id? When you edit the workflow the transition IDs are shown next to the specific transtions (see screenshot) I was able to do the transaction (for a test execution) via cURL to…

Hi @David Richards & @Carol Vercellino Guess this could be done with API calls / webhooks in automation rules. However this might be a big effort and the result might not be reliable and may need a lot of maintenance. I know there is a pretty good addon especially for the use case of syncing between 2 different systems…

Hi @Evanthia Charalampidou So we want to have easy access to all the issues that need to be tested through the test plan I got the point. My question is: Does the testplan then really tell the truth? Are eg. Stories REALLY tested with the testplan? How could the testplan test those stories when there are no TestCases that…

Hi @Ryan Gill As far as the linking is already made by the workflow post-function the automation rule only needs to react to trigger of "issue linked". This will also take the source issue into context (which as far as I got it right will be your Service Management issue). The destination issue in this case is the newly…

HELL YEAH!!! solved it 💪 I left out A4J to create sub test execution. everything done now in the github action.

It depends on where this requirement was set. Could be a validator in the workflow (create transition) or in the global settings for fields. Global settings (specific permission required) * in the project menu bar (left) go to project settings > Summary > Fields * choose the field configuration that is assigned to the…

Hi @David Backup and welcome to the community, for me this looks like your jira system/screen scheme is configured that the descirption field is a required field. As this field is not filled with content in the test result file it cannot be imported. Looking forward to your answer. Best Stefan

Hi @Ryan Gill , to really find a solution that matches exactly your needs please specify your use case in more details and from a functional perspective. Best Stefan

ok great. Thanks very much for the information :)

Honestly I was impressed myself. Found this in another discussion here in the community and immediatley thought that would exactly be what you were searching for :) So happy it works now. Please consider to click accept so that this question gets marked solved 🙌🏼 Best Stefan

Hi andre.gans@dominolaser.com As mentioned I was experimenting with cypress. I read through a whole bunch of documentations on how/which format test result files need to look like. Ended up with a special reporter that creates JUnit xml. I guess there are better, more elegant and more efficient ways to do. Need to add that…

Hi @Adrian.Seiler , got aware of another a format option for quarter. {{now.format("Q")}} This will give you the number of the quarter of the specific date. Best Stefan

Awesome. Good to know it works now 🙌💪

You are welcome 😉🙌

Hi @Jordi Zmiani and welcome to the community, first of all tbh: I have no experience with the used app. I use Github for Jira from Marketplace. I tested with my integration and with Github for Jira the rule is triggered on mergePR. Did you do a fast-forward merge? The ff doesn´t create a merge commit and I could imagen…

Hi @Nathan Hutchins the following pattern should do the format as expected: {{now.convertToTimeZone("PST8PDT").format("yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm a")}} see documentation to date/time smart values: https://support.atlassian.com/cloud-automation/docs/jira-smart-values-date-and-time/ Please let me know if this works. Best Stefan

Is there anything giving more input in the audit log of the automation rule? Does the rule anything or just no result at all? Did you also consider the .isBefore - .isAfter function for smart values? i guess with this it could be decreased to 3 main-branches of if-conditions. {{[date1].isBefore([date2])}}…

I guess it‘s a question of yout requirement and/or your way of working. I get your point that global transitions are not an option. Workflow are designed to follow a certain process. There comes the difficulty: as it seems the linked issue you r trying to transition is not in the correct. otherwise it could inherit the…

As there have been many different changes at once all of these things needs to be considered to recheck with your configuration before those changes. * there could have been a validator in the workflow that was used before * there could also be a change in the new screen scheme * Please also consider the following…