JamieA Expert

no apology necessary, but thanks.

to disable indexing just set the custom field to have no indexer.

Are you sure that's the reason - can you test with a script that just returns null? What indexer are you using?

No, it will be not be leaving files open. Why don't you see what files are open with lsof? You can create an issue, sure, but I'm not seeing a real problem yet.

Hi Andy, > it would need to open a file for each issue that has a scripted field that has groovy file? Possibly... although it would also close it. Seems related to https://jamieechlin.atlassian.net/browse/GRV-206 - maybe you could watch that issue.

> NoClassDefFoundError and not the 2nd when I didn't change any scripted files or script transitions/fields Which class was not found? No... sounds improbable that nothing changed but you got different results. Have you got the log files? > I upped ullimit to 4096 and it now re-indexes successfully 4096 is really very…

No problem ;-) Yes, after restoring the old database it should definitely have run through the upgrade procedure.... > Is there another way to tackle this problem? No, I think you are doing it the right way. > log stating that certain tables were missing, etc., which I did not expect, so I abandoned ship That's normal...…

It looks for a property called BUILD_NUMBER or something similar in the Property tables. However if the database is old, then the buildNumber will be old, and it will upgrade. You can't run the upgrade twice though without restoring the older database, it will expect the old schema.

I don't think Pablo claimed to be a technical expert on "your solution", and last I looked, this was a public forum so everyone and anyone is entitled to chime in. Moreover, his comments were interesting and seem valid.

Looks like a problem with spacing or newlines. In your last example Paula you have a space at the end of the lines, but you may well not have that in your default field. For a test try: assert template == cfValues['Comment to C1'] It will blow up in a nasty way but the logged message should show you where they differ.

Well you are saying "Flagged" OR "with a comment". Do you want to say if it's flagged it must have a comment? Do you want the comment to be required when the issue is first flagged, or every transition thereafter?

cfValues is only available in Simple Scripted Validator IIRC. That said there seems to be a bug in the type-checking. It's marked as an error but works fine: https://productsupport.adaptavist.com/browse/SRJIRA-2101

Also see https://studio.plugins.atlassian.com/browse/JBHV-168 . Does that apply here?

When you turn logging on is there anything in the logs? Can you go to the behaviours admin page, do Edit (I think) for the bad one and paste here the xml that you see in the big text field.

Field security... are you talking about a plugin? If so which one? This is not in base jira.

No there is nothing out of the box, assuming you mean field tabs and not issue tab panels. I don't see how a listener is appropriate here. You can do stuff with javascript to hide tabs, but you need to make sure that the same restrictions apply to the SOAP and REST APIs, which is more complicated. Do you want some groups…

IIRC Henning's method is the only way to get links updated in this transition, for everything else use the proper API.

If developer2 has a task to do on the issue, ie review it, then effectively it is assigned to him at that time, and probably best to change the assignee. You can do some clever things with a workflow function such that when dev2 hits "review completed" it is automatically re-assigned to dev1. Alternatively, and I think…

Upgrade to 3.0, you can have fully-custom scripts inline as well as in files. PS, you would not put it in the classpath, just somewhere on the filesystem and point to it.

It should do, but not exactly sure when. Within a month I'd say.

I had a look at this some time ago, the problem is the cf type doesn't implement some User custom field interface. Only instances of this type are shown in the custom field drop down. Pretty small change, so I would raise an issue.

Thanks... I was thinking of the midnight trick too, but I couldn't have users locked out for 20 mins even at midnight (London time... equals 8am SGP, 7pm NYC). But it's a quartz scheduled job, so you could schedule it to run at midnight with a bit of tinkering with the db or some groovy. One consequence of having 47k users…

You raise a ticket by clicking on Create Issue at top right hand corner. The text on the left is just html pasted into an Introduction portlet so doesn't know if you are logged in or not, and will always stay the same. A nice enhancement would be to use some javascript to tell if you are logged in and show something…

I cannot reproduce that. Can you provide version info? You can disable just the behaviours aspect if you go to Admin -> Behaviours, then click the disable link there.

if (issue.projectObject.key in ["ABC", "DEF"]) { return cfValues["Sprint"]}else { return true}

Nothing changed, and we got your support ticket too. Can you check for javascript errors by pressing F12, and make sure you click the "Preserve Log" checkbox so that the log is not erased on navigation.

You need to join jiraissue to IssueLink, then back to jiraissue, on source and destination to jiraissue.id. I find that these queries quickly get out of hand, and it's probably worth writing a plugin. That way you can also give your users access to the data without letting them query the db directly.

Yes, we use "Internal Directory with Delegated LDAP Authentication + Copy Users on First Login". In the old days we just had custom code that did the same thing. If you use this setup then you don't need to limit with filters, and any of your quarter million users will be able to log on. > Would you say this is the only…

1. That's just for using jira as the source of directory data, from eg, Confluence. 2. The 10k limit is the number for synchronising with LDAP, if you have more than 10k use filters (eg on user group) to reduce the number you sync. But for using the configuration you mention the number of users in LDAP is not an issue at…

> which means that if you need that same custom field type in another configuration you have to add a second custom field Not really, you should just add another field config, but you still have one instance of the custom field.