Need definition for 'Link Issue' types

[Pramod Hitnalli]

Hi Team,

Could you please provide the definition for following 'Link Issue' types

relates to
duplicates
is duplicated by
blocks
is blocked by
clones
is cloned by
is tested by a Test
Implements
Implemented by

[Jack Brickey · Accepted solution]

these seem self-explanatory so I hope my input doesn’t simply seem to restate the names.

• relates to - an issue relates to the linked issue in some way
• duplicates - issue AAA is a duplicate of issue BBB
• is duplicated by - issue BBB is duplicated by issue AAA
• blocks - issue AAA blocks issue BBB
• is blocked by - issue BBB is blocked by issue AAA
• clones - issue AAA clones issue BBB
• is cloned by - issue BBB is cloned by issue AAA
• is tested by a Test - I have no idea, this doesn’t seem to be a default link type
• Implements - I have no idea, this doesn’t seem to be a default link type
• Implemented by - I have no idea, this doesn’t seem to be a default link type

[josh_sutterfield]

Except "clone" clones "duplicate". In exactly the same way, your input simply seems to restate the names, or "clone" them, or "duplicate" them. They are not self-explanatory or the asker wouldn't ask. Instead they have intents that can be revealed.

[Jack Brickey]

Hi @josh_sutterfield , sorry if you found my input no to be useful. I tried to provide useful input but it doesn't always work for everyone and I truly get that.

One question for you. In your reply you mention  "clone" clones "duplicate". I'm not sure what you mean but for me I use "clone" link type whenever I use the Clone feature to create the clone. I use the Duplicate link type whenever there is an unnecessary (?) duplicate. For example, a network issue prevents access to the internet and it is reported by five employees. In this case I work on and update the first issue reported and link the other four as dups and close them.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist- · Accepted solution]

The link types are entirely configurable, they don't have fixed definitions.  You could rename all the relationships to "Alice", "Bunny", "Playing card" and "Hedgehog" if you wanted to.

The list you've got there is mostly the English default set, and they've been written to try to be self-explanatory.  You can see this by adding dummy issues to them to make sentences:

• ABC-123 relates to  DEF-456
• ABC-234 duplicates DEF-567
• DEF-567 is duplicated by  ABC-234
• ABC-345 blocks  DEF-678
• DEF-678 is blocked by ABC-345
• ABC-456 clones  DEF-789
• DEF-789 is cloned by  ABC-456
• ABC-111 is tested by a Test  DEF-222
• ABC-567 Implements  DEF-890
• DEF-890 Implemented by  ABC-567

"is tested by" and "implements" are not default link types, they've been added by one of your admins (or possibly by an app an admin has added)

You'll notice a lot of these are paired - there's actually only one link type for "duplicate", "blocking", "cloning" and probably "implement" - the words you see in the sentence are trying to describe a directional relationship. 

Blocks is the easiest example; from my point of view "I block you", and from your point of view, "Nic is blocking me" - same relationship, but a different description which tells you where you're looking from!

But, going back to the question, the short answer is "the meaning of the links is up to you" - your admins should set up the ones you find useful and name them clearly!

[Ismail Sanni]

Hi @Pramod Hitnalli

and everyone else

The words themselves are the definitions

- relates to - This means that lets say you've got many issues and two or more of the issues are related to each other, so you can use the link 'relates to'. Let me use a simple example, let's say Pramod is an issue and Papa Pramod is an issue, so we can link both Pramod and Papa Pramod together, so Pramod relates to Papa Pramod. Note this doesn't mean the issues are the same, it just means that the issues are related and that there is a connection between the issues. Pramod and Papa Pramod are not the same, but they are connected by blood 

- duplicates - This means an issue duplicate's another issue. Pramod is a duplicate of Papa Pramod, which means an issue is exactly like another issue or an issue is having corresponding or identical parts

- is duplicated by - An issue is duplicated by another issue. Papa Pramod is duplicated by Pramod.

- blocks - This means an issue blocks another issue. To my understanding, this means that this issue is an obstacle to the normal progress, transition or functioning of another issue

- is blocked by - This means an issue is blocked by another issue, which is like the opposite of 'blocks'

- clones - This means an issue clones another issue which means an issue is designed to simulate the exact operation of another issue.

- is cloned by - This means an issue is cloned by another issue

- is tested by a Test - This isn't a default link, meaning it was created by someone in your organization and the meaning to this particular link type should be in the description of the link type.

- Implements - This isn't a default link, meaning it was created by someone in your organization and the meaning to this particular link type should be in the description of the link type.

- Implemented by - This isn't a default link, meaning it was created by someone in your organization and the meaning to this particular link type should be in the description of the link type.

[maria chien]

@Ismail Sanni I can understand the types - it is pretty self explanatory.

However, the issue here is that if the base issue where the all this the base issue, is fixed, will the status or 'resolution' field of the issue that is marked duplicate be updated?

in example above, once Papa Pramod status is updated, can/will the resolution field of Pramod be also updated so that the one watching Pramod can be notified?

[Jack Brickey]

@maria chien ,

no. linked issues stand alone, they are in no manner updated automatically simply based on the linked issue changing. The exception here is if you have implemented some automation or script to do so.

[josh_sutterfield]

Words do not self-define unless the word is "word", or something cute like that. Other than that, language has nuances and sometimes requires interrogation of intent. In my case while these things can be used however we see fit, it seems like there was intent behind the language that might be valuable to think about. I can't distinguish duplication from cloning, yet I'm quite convinced there must be a distinction for those who created this feature. That actually has an answer, besides just "it explains itself without explanation". That answer that terms self-define could have been given without it being given, and is by nature not the answer if the answer is sought at all, yet it was given.

[shruti gupta]

Hi @Pramod Hitnalli 

Please refer the atlassian document for the link issue detail,

https://support.atlassian.com/jira-core-cloud/docs/link-an-issue/

[Pramod Hitnalli]

Hi Shruti, 

Thank you for your reply.

I need definition. Could you please help me to get the definition.

Regards,

Pramod