Jack Brickey Expert

Ok so then in the QR trigger go to the Details of the rule and ensure you have this box checked... "Check to allow other rule actions...". my bet is on this being the problem.

Please see my last response that overlapped your update.

Ah! how is that field being updated? Is there another automation rule? You say this is an equation but Jira natively does not have any mathematical fields. As @Bill Sheboy mentions Automation does not support addon custom fields. I fear that is what we are dealing with here. 😬

@Shushan Martirosyan , let us know if this is working for you.

Well that's no good. Unfortunately I can adequately test on my side before I share it. The last bit in the filter (and status changed to accepted after startofday(-14)) should keep any issues moved to accepted after 14d ago ~Sept15. Can look at the History of one of the accepted issues you expect to remain and check when…

@Bridgette Dennis , so are you using the smart value? Is the name of the sprint literally "10.01.23 sprint"? if so the smart value would be... {{sprint.remove("10.01.23 sprint")}}

hi @Rama Krishna Ravipati , oops...I see an error try this... project = OGA AND component in ("Implementation/Partnership Services") AND issuetype in (story, Task, Defect, Spike, Enabler) AND (status != accepted or (status = accepted and status changed to accepted after startofday(-14)))

Yes, that is one of the downsides of a condition for sure. So I generally favor of Validator where I can add an explanation or error message of what is needed. So I think in your case, adding a Validator for each field that needs to be updated would be the preferred approach. Of course, that means more labels in the…

@Paul Krueger , I certainly appreciate all the challenges that we all will be facing…and indeed, this is a step backwards…and I hope that Atlassian changes their mind. In lieu of any reversal, we will be faced with those challenges and the need to continually look at how to manage through it or move on to other…

@Serginho , while I too believe the decision is bad I wanted to comment on a possible solution for your UC. Build your workflow and create screen such that the user creating the issue to tag the financial-team. I only offer this is an example of how we are going to have to rethink the usage of automation. Before automation…

@Rama Krishna Ravipati & @Valerie Knapp , the issue boils down to how the "Hide completed issues older than" filter actually works. It leverages the "updated date" so when an issue that naturally ages of the board is later updated then it will reappear on the board in the clock start over. At least this has been my…

you can contact Atlassian support but to be honest I think it would be a long shot to expect they would address. IMO you should employ good change processes and/or a sandbox to test changes.

indeed...puzzled and anxious to understand the culprit @Lana Kelly 

Thanks for sharing. So when you import that CSV does the value of 17 get placed into the W3S2-3225 issue? If we can get it to work for that single issue then all we need to do is create a row for every other issue US to update.

Yep. here is an example. One thing to note is that it is often undesirable to have the exact same summary as it makes it a little more challenging to differentiate. If you prefer to differentiate each issue then we could leverage smart values four Setting the summary value. As an example ... Sub-task {{issue.key}} -…

which path did you succeed with?

Hi @Kel Hill , unless you can somehow capture the user's email in a field, you will be unable to export it using a JQL filter. In other words, a JQL filter operates on issues and fields. User fields will only have the username. However, as you have pointed out there are cases where the email itself is the user name. An…

Hi @rmax , there is not a means of doing this natively. I have seen marketplace add-ons that support dynamic custom fields but I have not personally used any myself. I did the following search in the marketplace that you might want to have a look at if that is an…

Another test to run... change the trigger to "issue updated" then ONLY edit the QR field and observe results. Does it trigger? If not then the issue lies with detection of change made to QR. if it does trigger the the issue lies with the "field changed" trigger specifically for the QR field or field type. It would also, be…

No worries Lana I am glad to assist. what type of field is QR? Though all types are supported I believe. Are you absolutely sure the field is getting updated? Are you testing with the same issue that was triggering when Severity was used? I have to wonder if we are hitting a bug but it really would surprise me as the…

Hi @Shushan Martirosyan , welcome to the community. There are some missing information here required to give you a quality answer. Could you please describe more completely your used case? You speak of cloning as an example of how data is propagated from the original to the clone. However, that clearly is not what you were…

@Bhanu prakash , welcome to the Community. What defines "verified" in your workflow? Is it a status or field or comment or?? let's say it is a status called "Verified". In that case the following JQL would return all issues verified in the previous day. You could save the filter and set a subscription to email the results…

Just to be sure try replacing your current JSON with the below { "update": { "components": [{ "add": {"name": "testkomponente"} }] } } Alternatively , why not simply place testkomponent into the provided Components field and select add/remove via the ellipses?

I believe this may not be for Cloud but not sure.

Why do you wish for the old statuses to remain? Unless you use the "all" transition to one or more of the statuses associated with the workflow then any issue that is in an old "abandoned " status cannot be transitioned. It would seem to me that you would want every issue in an old "to be abandoned" status to be…

Hi @GC , here is an approach to consider... create an automation rule that will trigger on that field being updated. You would have an action that would add a label, which would indicate the field was updated. Now add a condition (or Validator) in the workflow that checks that the label exists.

Hi @Sebastian Schwabe , I see a "/" in "components" can you remove this?

Thanks for confirming. So it certainly seems odd. Can you or have you tested with using a different field recently? For example, if you change the trigger based on The priority field. If that works then test out a custom field, if you have one. And just to be sure, you checked the Audit log and are not seeing the rule…

to be clear if you use Manual trigger the rest of the rule works but if you trigger on the field changing and you change the field then the rule does not trigger. Is that correct?

Hi @Lana Kelly , I see you accepted the answers here but your last comment seems to convey you still have issues? If things still are not quite right please let's us know.