Uploaded image for project: 'JIRA Importers Plugin'
  1. JIRA Importers Plugin
  2. JIM-194

Import both Severity and Priority from Mantis/Bugzilla

This issue belongs to an archived project. You can view it, but you can't modify it. Learn more

    • Icon: Suggestion Suggestion
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Icon: Medium Medium
    • 2.1
    • None
    • Bugzilla, Mantis
    • None

      Came from http://confluence.atlassian.com/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=192840&focusedCommentId=229181812#comment-229181812

      That's a valid point we do import Severity as a Priority. That's a misleading. We do this on purpose because JIRA has a different mindset and promotes using a single field.

      We need to decide whether we want to import issues and make them more JIRA-alike or just import issues to fully reflect the original data.

      What would be better for our customers?

      I'm not sure whether making issues JIRA-alike is the thing they expect the most from the importer.

            [JIM-194] Import both Severity and Priority from Mantis/Bugzilla

            Katherine Yabut made changes -
            Workflow Original: JIM - workflow v2 [ 1612205 ] New: JIM Suggestion Workflow v2 [ 3156556 ]
            Ignat (Inactive) made changes -
            Issue Type Original: Improvement [ 4 ] New: Suggestion [ 10000 ]
            Owen made changes -
            Resolution New: Fixed [ 1 ]
            Status Original: Closed [ 6 ] New: Closed [ 6 ]
            Ignat (Inactive) made changes -
            Workflow Original: JIM Project Workflow (Software Simplified) [ 1606327 ] New: JIM - workflow v2 [ 1612205 ]
            Ignat (Inactive) created issue -

            Tested with Mantis 1.1.8, Mantis 1.2.4, Bugzilla 2.20 and Bugzilla 3.6.3 with various combinations - built-in priority vs. custom fields - looks good now

            Wojtek Seliga (Inactive) added a comment - Tested with Mantis 1.1.8, Mantis 1.2.4, Bugzilla 2.20 and Bugzilla 3.6.3 with various combinations - built-in priority vs. custom fields - looks good now

            Problem with the configuration file was that Priority value mappings were saved with a key having an uppercase letter, we expected them to be all lowercase when reading so it wasn't possible to match value to the field.

            Now all fields are stored lowercase. Fixed similar problem for Severity too.

            Renamed ValueMappingDefinition.getName to getExternalFieldId so name will suggest the actual usage.

            Pawel Niewiadomski (Inactive) added a comment - Problem with the configuration file was that Priority value mappings were saved with a key having an uppercase letter, we expected them to be all lowercase when reading so it wasn't possible to match value to the field. Now all fields are stored lowercase. Fixed similar problem for Severity too. Renamed ValueMappingDefinition.getName to getExternalFieldId so name will suggest the actual usage.

            Attached sample cfg file which shows this problem.

            Wojtek Seliga (Inactive) added a comment - Attached sample cfg file which shows this problem.

            Critical bug found: even if you specify the mapping for the priority (built-in system field) it's ignored by the importer (tried with Bugzilla) and new priorities are created as if "Map as is" were used.

            Wojtek Seliga (Inactive) added a comment - Critical bug found: even if you specify the mapping for the priority (built-in system field) it's ignored by the importer (tried with Bugzilla) and new priorities are created as if "Map as is" were used.

            That's a good win-win compromise, Wojtek. Thank you.

            Christopher Watson added a comment - That's a good win-win compromise, Wojtek. Thank you.

              Unassigned Unassigned
              Anonymous Anonymous
              Archiver:
              dnorton@atlassian.com Dave Norton

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Archived: