History | Log In     View a printable version of the current page.  
Issue Details (XML | Word | Printable)

Key: JRA-10245
Type: New Feature New Feature
Status: Open Open
Priority: Critical Critical
Assignee: Unassigned
Reporter: Alexander Dreger
Votes: 15
Watchers: 7
Operations

If you were logged in you would be able to see more operations.
JIRA

Ability to filter/view Issues upon "Versions" across multiple "Projects"

Created: 23/May/06 07:59 AM   Updated: 03/Apr/08 10:58 AM
Component/s: Filtering & Indexing, Administration, Issue navigator
Affects Version/s: 3.6.1 Enterprise
Fix Version/s: None

Time Tracking:
Not Specified

Issue Links:
Cloners
 
Duplicate
 

Participants: Alexander Dreger, amanda king, Andrew Wong, Jean, Maarten van Wensveen, Rachael Russell and Scott Farquhar [Atlassian]
Since last comment: 5 weeks, 5 days ago
Labels:


 Description  « Hide
Greetings from Berlin, Germany!

Our JIRA-Deployment contains 4 "Projects" which have the same "Version"-Structure and Release/Rollout-Dates.
Currently, in order to have an Overview of Issues mapped to a certain "Version", we have to open each "Project"-Overview (Roadmap) separetely and check the involved Issues per "Project"....

It is currently not possible, to have an immediate and full Overview concerning all the Issues scheduled to a certain "Version" across multiple Projects sharing the same "Versions"-Structure.
This is a big Handycap for our Workflow, as we have to open 4 Roadmaps of 4 different Projects in order to make a Statement concerning the Status of a onstanding (or already released) Version.

Moreover, the Issue Navigator does not allow us to search/filter for "Fix Version" across all Projects - this is only possible for one Project at a time...

The lack of this "Feature" makes our daily JIRA-Work cumbersome, and it would be great if you could/would implement the Possibilty to fetch the "Version"-Information across multiple Projects as well as a possibility to search/filter for Versions across multiple Projects in Issue Navigator as soon as possible...

Thanx in Advance,

Cheers,

Alexander



 All   Comments   Work Log   Change History      Sort Order: Ascending order - Click to sort in descending order
Scott Farquhar [Atlassian] - 23/May/06 09:20 AM
I think that the solution to this would be to allow you to replace the system 'version' field with a version custom field, where you can configure the options on either a per project basis, or perhaps across projects.

You can do this currently if you wish, and just hide the system 'project' field.

Would that work for you?


Jean - 31/May/06 12:50 PM
We had to implement this (along with Component/s) as custom fields in order for multiple projects to search.

That way we lost the ability to "manage" the versions, and also compromise on the individuality of the drop down values of the projects.

Just presenting the system 'Component/s' and the 'affects/fix version' fields and allow for a text search would help a bit.


Alexander Dreger - 01/Jun/06 02:36 AM
Sorry guys, i still do not understand the suggested Solution to the Problem - would you be so kind and explain it to me again?

@Jean: - i don't understand what you mean by "Just presenting the system 'Component/s' and the 'affects/fix version' fields and allow for a text search would help a bit.":

  • our Projects do not share the same Components but only the same Versions-Structure

@Scott - waht do you mean by "just hide the system 'project' field"? Where/how can i achieve this and would it have an effect on other JIRA-Functions?

I'm looking for a new Solution which would not cut off already useful JIRA-Features...


Jean - 01/Jun/06 07:31 AM
Hi Alexander,

If you select a single project, Component/s and the Version/s-related fields are presented in filtering as a drop-down lists with the value in the list as defined for that project.

If selecting 2+ projects, then these fields are not presented for filtering anymore. May be it's difficult to present a list of combined values from all projects in scope?

I am not sure if making them availabile as text search, like how summary or description can be searched, would be an easy fix?

Thanks,
Jean


Jean - 01/Jun/06 07:34 AM
Clarification: my suggestion to perhaps make these fields searchable as text search when multiple projects are selected is to Atlassian (JIRA), not to Jira users.

amanda king - 17/Jul/07 01:27 PM
My company would benefit from the ability to select multiple fields and have all custom fields display/searchable/queriable if there is different content in the dropdown of each project, just include them ALL.?
This has been a big issue for us as we have to run each project separately and then pull them into one excel. Not pretty!

Maarten van Wensveen - 20/Aug/07 07:56 AM
Our company needs the same kind of flexibility in making filters.

We would like to run filters to see what issues are logged on component's with the same version number cross multiple projects .
Hopefully this will be implemented verry soon.


Andrew Wong - 08/Nov/07 06:02 PM
It would be very useful to search by version. The reason for this is that there maybe multiple issues for multiple projects on the same version. It is quite handy to see all the versions in one filter.

Rachael Russell - 03/Apr/08 10:58 AM
A possible extension on this idea would be a higher level ('enterprise') release version...

Ie when there are multiple projects (ie data conversion, projects for shared libraries, various other projects hanginig off) that will be released together that follow either the same or different version numbering/release dates etc, but generally need to be tested together, having an 'enterprise level Version' to gather up all the versions of the 'sub projects' that go with this overall version could be handy? And the ability (if you have the right permissions) to query over the 'Enterprise' level version, and create road maps, and release note (with sub-road maps/release notes etc for each project in that version).

I work on various 'enterprise' projects where there are diff versions of the db and code, and it can be hard to work out which go together (and impact of changes in one on the other). Being able to wrap them up into one search etc at the higher level could be rather useful.

bit of a lengthy explination on that one sorry!