When do use resolutions vs statuses?

[Benjamin Peikes]

We currently have a single "end" status of "Done" for our Jira issues, and then a handful of resolutions. The issue is that when status changes to "Done" occur, and they trigger comments on other issues, it's hard to see exactly why an issue is closed out, i.e. implemented, won't do, duplicate, etc.

Since there are status categories, I'm wondering if there is any need to have a "resolution" at all since reports can filter on status category.

What are the benefits of using resolutions? How do you decide on a case by case basis, when to add a new status, vs adding a new resolution? 

One of the reasons resolutions are problematic is that they are global, while statuses are limited to the workflow.

We have several service desks, as well as several projects that have their own set of workflows, and having a global set of resolutions is very problematic.

[Mayur Jadhav]

Hi @Benjamin Peikes 

Jira handles all issues without a set resolution as open and with a resolution set as resolved.

There are many things that rely on this, for example the my open issues filter/gadget.

For this it doesn't matter, if the status is done or something else.

So you should make sure, that the resolution is set in the last status of your workflow (and removed when you reopen an issue). You can call it whatever you like.

To be consistent, the status that you are you using for the done status, should be of the done status category

Basically the Jira workflow is a set of statuses and transitions that an issue moves through during its lifecycle. An issue's status indicates its current place in the project's workflow. 

Resolutions are the ways in which an issue can be closed, or completed, or resolved, in many ways. An issue resolution is usually set when the status is changed.

There is some good documentation about the status and resolution fields.

https://confluence.atlassian.com/cloudkb/best-practices-on-using-the-resolution-field-968660796.html

https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiracloud/working-with-workflows-776636540.html

https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiracloud/issue-statuses-priorities-and-resolutions-973500867.html

https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiracloud/configuring-statuses-resolutions-and-priorities-776636333.html

Thanks,

Mayur

[Benjamin Peikes]

The issues we have are in two places:

1) Linked issues only show the state, not the resolution, so there is no way to easily differentiate an issue marked as “Closed” with a resolution of “Won’t Do” and an issue which is closed and implemented.

2) If you have any automation rules which place comments on issues when closed, the resolution is not included, which means you cant easily tell why it was closed, ie “Wont do”, “Fixed”, or “Cannot reproduce”

Since there are Status categories, you would think that everything should run off that, not having a resolution set.

Its a huge issue. If closed issues should always have a resolution it should be enforced.

Plus you can have a transition or automation rule set a resolution even if status is not in the closed category.

[Joe Pitt]

The short answer is yes.  In Jira setting the resolution means the work is done. The assigned to me report only shows issues assigned to the user if they DO NOT have a resolution. Start to complete report uses the resolution. Boards won't show the issue as complete if the resolution isn't set. The resolution field should ONLY be on the screen shown in the transition to done or set with a post function in the transition. It should NEVER be on the create or edit screen. If it is shown it is required.