• 5
    • 11
    • We collect Jira feedback from various sources, and we evaluate what we've collected when planning our product roadmap. To understand how this piece of feedback will be reviewed, see our Implementation of New Features Policy.

      NOTE: This suggestion is for JIRA Server. Using JIRA Cloud? See the corresponding suggestion.

      Atlassian Update - 23 April 2015

      Hi everyone,

      Thanks for voting and commenting on this issue. Your input in the comments helps us understand how this affects you and what you're hoping to accomplish with JIRA.

      This suggestion is a priority for the JIRA development team, but I am not able to provide an accurate estimate for when this will be resolved. We will update this issue as soon as we can confidently project a release.

      Please remember that jira.atlassian.com is one of many inputs for the JIRA roadmap. You can learn more about our process here.

      I understand that our decision may be disappointing. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

      Regards,
      Dave Meyer
      dmeyer@atlassian.com
      Product Manager, JIRA Platform

      Some of our project members are rumbling about having to assign issues, when on some of the other projects this is important. It seems this (along with some other options, such as mailing and voting) would make more sense as an option on the project rather than on the whole server.

            [JRASERVER-1001] Allow unassigned issues on a per-project basis

            Open - 22 years ago

            Last update - 7 years ago

            Last update message - This suggestion is a priority for the JIRA development team.........

             

            I think your definition of priority and my definition of priority are not the same.

            Jeanne Howe added a comment - Open - 22 years ago Last update - 7 years ago Last update message - This suggestion is a priority for the JIRA development team.........   I think your definition of priority and my definition of priority are not the same.

            Why is this seriously still 'Unassigned'? You lost this ticket because it is unassigned across all of Jira instead of just the project that it belongs to and no one is specifically watching 'Unassigned' issues in the project right? How about make this feature request a reality and this wont happen anymore. Hmm.

            Lance Stratton added a comment - Why is this seriously still 'Unassigned'? You lost this ticket because it is unassigned across all of Jira instead of just the project that it belongs to and no one is specifically watching 'Unassigned' issues in the project right? How about make this feature request a reality and this wont happen anymore. Hmm.

            I agree with the others. Making an issue unassigned results in the ticket being lost as noone feels responsible for it. I also wonder why the assignee attribute is treated differently as other attributes. If you set the option to allow unassigned issues at least you should be able to have it required via field configuration scheme. Makes no sense to me, to treat it any different.

            Manuel Bähnisch added a comment - I agree with the others. Making an issue unassigned results in the ticket being lost as noone feels responsible for it. I also wonder why the assignee attribute is treated differently as other attributes. If you set the option to allow unassigned issues at least you should be able to have it required via field configuration scheme. Makes no sense to me, to treat it any different.

            The fact that this is 'unassigned' offends me o_O 

            Jamie VanderZouwen added a comment - The fact that this is 'unassigned' offends me o_O 

            Please make this feature a reality.  Without it, I'm being asked to create dummy accounts so that people can assign to them.  That is a terrible workaround, as it uses a license and doesn't clearly show what is happening.  Is that intended?  Are you trying to make using up licenses with fake users the workaround?  What is your workaround for this otherwise?  We sure do pay a lot for Jira these days, and as much as I care about 'New Priority Icons', I think you can do better with your time.

            James VanderZouwen added a comment - Please make this feature a reality.  Without it, I'm being asked to create dummy accounts so that people can assign to them.  That is a terrible workaround, as it uses a license and doesn't clearly show what is happening.  Is that intended?  Are you trying to make using up licenses with fake users the workaround?  What is your workaround for this otherwise?  We sure do pay a lot for Jira these days, and as much as I care about 'New Priority Icons', I think you can do better with your time.

            Come on Atlassian, SEVENTEEN YEARS for a common sense feature request.

            Stop p****ing about with the UI for a while and develop some real features that real customers are asking for.

            Ronald Vallenduuk added a comment - Come on Atlassian, SEVENTEEN YEARS for a common sense feature request. Stop p****ing about with the UI for a while and develop some real features that real customers are asking for.

            We need to be able to make the Assignee field Required as part of Field Configurations.

            Our use case is to require Assignee at all times on Epics in specific projects so that there is a Point Of Contact for all the work in the Epic.

            Using Workflow Validators for this leaves two loopholes:

            1. The Assignee field on the Epic can be set to Unassigned, and that will not be fixed until the Epic goes through a Status Transition.
            2. A Story can be "Moved" and changed to an Epic, and Assignee will not be required to be filled in during that process. Again, the problem won't be caught and fixed until the Epic goes through a Status Transition.

            Trudy Claspill added a comment - We need to be able to make the Assignee field Required as part of Field Configurations. Our use case is to require Assignee at all times on Epics in specific projects so that there is a Point Of Contact for all the work in the Epic. Using Workflow Validators for this leaves two loopholes: The Assignee field on the Epic can be set to Unassigned, and that will not be fixed until the Epic goes through a Status Transition. A Story can be "Moved" and changed to an Epic, and Assignee will not be required to be filled in during that process. Again, the problem won't be caught and fixed until the Epic goes through a Status Transition.

            We lost 25 minutes in a meeting because you don't have this feature. Please develop this.

            Yosun Goral added a comment - We lost 25 minutes in a meeting because you don't have this feature. Please develop this.

            This issue was noted as being a priority for the development team since 2015 and it is 2018 and we still don't have a solution for this. It would be great since Atlassian recognized the utility of this feature in 2015 if it could be added to the project plan.

             

            Thanks for all your hard work on Jira we all appreciate it.

            AJ Schmalenberger added a comment - This issue was noted as being a priority for the development team since 2015 and it is 2018 and we still don't have a solution for this. It would be great since Atlassian recognized the utility of this feature in 2015 if it could be added to the project plan.   Thanks for all your hard work on Jira we all appreciate it.

            Through the years, our team has received and continues to receive requests to enable the unassigned issues. The problem is that the unassigned issues does not work for all the projects and therefore, we cannot enable it. It is important that this functionality is configurable per project.

            Deleted Account (Inactive) added a comment - Through the years, our team has received and continues to receive requests to enable the unassigned issues. The problem is that the unassigned issues does not work for all the projects and therefore, we cannot enable it. It is important that this functionality is configurable per project.

              Unassigned Unassigned
              8397740ea872 Michael Phillimore-Brown
              Votes:
              253 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              123 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: