Uploaded image for project: 'Automation for Cloud'
  1. Automation for Cloud
  2. AUTO-1404

Automation Condition Issue Fields: Update Automation Conditions for their values when said values are updated elsewhere.

XMLWordPrintable

    • Our product teams collect and evaluate feedback from a number of different sources. To learn more about how we use customer feedback in the planning process, check out our new feature policy.

    • Jira Service Management

      Problem Definition

      If I create an Automation that has an Issue Fields Condition for: Request Type equals <value>, the value I set it to check for won't be updated if I update its source.

      i.e. if I go to my Request Types and change Get IT Help to Get IT HELP, the Condition will fail to be met despite the difference only being casing.

      This is true for Select Custom Field options as well.

      As a note, for Assets Custom Fields, a "Match case" checkbox appears when that is chosen, since the end user must specify the value being checked against. That would be helpful for non-Assets Custom Fields in case the values are changed, if only a little.

      Suggested Solution

      Either:

      1. Use the value IDs instead of raw Strings in the Automation Rule configuration so that the name of the Request Type isn't what is actually checked, or...
      2. Update the Conditions' value entries to the updated value since the source of the values that can be chosen is only what's available in Request Types, and the old value no longer exists. i.e. if I update a Select Custom Field's option, go through the Automation Rules and update the Conditions' values to be checked. Same for Request Types.

      The Match Case checkbox is not an ideal solution since it doesn't solve the issue in situations where more than just case is changed.

      Workaround

      Go to the Automation Rules that are failing to have the condition met and switch the value to something else, then back to the correct value. This will update its casing.

      This is as true for entirely renaming a Request Type as it is for just updating its casing.

              Unassigned Unassigned
              992127aa63ec Payden Pringle
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: