-
Bug
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Medium (View bug fix roadmap)
-
3.5.2
-
3.05
-
3
-
Currently JIRA attempts to validate the issue's reporter when it is being moved. So if the original reporter doesn't have the create issue permission in the target project, then their reporter will be changed.
While this way maintains the integrity of the destination project (reporters always have the create permission), it's usually not that useful and not particularly intuitive. Generally, people want to keep the reporter data, even if the issue is moved.
This becomes an especially large problem when users are "deactivated" by having all their permissions removed, so that still have issues they reported even though they don't have the permission to. When doing things that trigger a bulk move like Issue Type Scheme migration, the reporter information for these issues are lost.
The reporter field should probably be excluded from the move process altogether.
(NB Not sure if a Bug or Improvment)
- is duplicated by
-
-
- Closed
-
![[Extranet] Page](/images/icons/generic_link_16.png "[Extranet] Page"){kind=icon}
[JRASERVER-9604] Reporter information can be lost when bulk moving issues
Sure matt.doar.
Hi wthompson, could you please evaluate if https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA/Modifying+Multiple+%28Bulk%29+Issues needs to be modified to call-out the info requested by matt.doar here?
Thanks mate.
Cheers,
Os.
Got it. I think some docs somewhere need to warn that after a bulk move you might have reporters that will be invalid in the new project. I guess that means that when a project admin with Modify Reporter permission edits an issue they may be prompted to change the reporter to a valid user?
We now keep the original reporter matt.doar, due to the considerations explained in the description and as per the Testing Notes we followed to QA the issue
Regards,
Oswaldo Hernández.
JIRA Bugmaster.
[Atlassian].
Marcin Kempa [Atlassian] how did this one get fixed? Does Bulk Move warn you somehow now?
Edwin Stol
added a comment - Thanks Eric OK, I've added this to the backlog. There are just under 200 issues on the backlog and many of them will be fixed before this one.
Edwin Stol
added a comment - +1 
G B
added a comment - Eric, please reconsider this. We still have users that move dozens of issues individually instead of in bulk every day in order to work around this horrible bug.
G B
added a comment - Eric, please reconsider this. We still have users that move dozens of issues individually instead of in bulk every day in order to work around this horrible bug. Hi sanusoman321,
This is an issue that we do want to fix at some stage. While we are currently trying to focus more on older issues like this than we have in the past, this particular issue is not on our short term roadmap.
Regards,
Eric
Sean Kamath
added a comment - One last question: Why can I move a SINGLE ticket with a reporter that isn't in that role required, but only bulk moving fails?
I can only assume this is a lost cause. . .
Sean Kamath
added a comment - One last question: Why can I move a SINGLE ticket with a reporter that isn't in that role required, but only bulk moving fails?
I can only assume this is a lost cause. . . Sean Kamath
added a comment - Wow. This is 5 years old. This bug is killing me. It should AT THE LEAST be an option to override.
Sean Kamath
added a comment - Wow. This is 5 years old . This bug is killing me. It should AT THE LEAST be an option to override. Sean Kamath
added a comment - Why is the option to "retain" presented if it's not an option? This is not a feature request, this is a bug.
Sean Kamath
added a comment - Why is the option to "retain" presented if it's not an option? This is not a feature request, this is a bug.
Was this fixed in 6.3 or in 6.2.x ?
JRA-41535claims that it is not reproducible in 6.2.7.