I am currently running a service desk for my shop and I am running into an issue that just seems to have popped up. I will admit that I am probably missing something obvious but I just cannot seem to find it.
I have the default "Transition on comment" automation that works sometimes. I cannot really place a rhyme or reason to it. I have attached a screenshot but basically, the issue is that when customers respond it never transitions to "respond to support" and/or "waiting for support." Sometimes it does, and I can show screenshots of that with a second user, and the users both exist in what I know as the "customer" group in the permissions section.
As I stated before I am sure that I am missing something obvious and my inexperience and ignorance with this system is showing, so any help would be greatly appreciated!
Hi @William Edwards ,
welcome to the Atlassian Community!
These two actions are usually used in situation, where customer and support are communicating about some problem.
It should work like this:
When customer responds and status is "Waiting for customer", status is automatically changed to "Waiting for support".
When support responds and status is "Waiting for support", status is automatically changed to "Waiting for customer".
So, about the "not executed". I can see, that condition for status has been fulfilled (status is "Waiting for customer"), but author of the comment was not a customer. So in this case it doesn't make sense to switch it to "Waiting for support", because the customer didn't contribute to the issue.
Are you able to find out (based on the issue key and comment time), who did this comment? Does this user has Jira Service Desk licence?
So I can confirm that in this case the user who made the comment was indeed the customer who open the original request however it would appear that there was one key factor at play.
We are currently going through a migration where our emails are changing. This user opened the ticket with their new email that is currently forwarding all incoming emails to their existing, but soon to be legacy, email.
So when the system sent them the reply, they replied using their legacy email, to a ticket that was opened with their new email, which therefore, if understand the logic correctly, means that technically the "customer" did not respond.