Hi everyone,
This is Radu from the JSM Assets team. Thank you for your feedback currentReporter() scope function. To set the right expectations, we will not be addressing this feature in the near term. You can check our new feature policy for more information on how we decide what we implement.
This feature is working as intended given that currentReporter() relates to the scope of creation for the Jira issue. For example a customer may create an issue on behalf of someone else so at that point the currentReporter() would move the the creator of the issue rather than the reporter noted on the ticket. Furthermore the execution of currentReporter() function requires an active creation scope to retrieve the value, given the automation rule triggers after the creation even and after that scope is closed the currentReporter is not available for processing.
We will be updating our documentation to clarify and be explicit that currentReporter() is not equal to the issue Reporter.
Thank you again for your feedback.
Best,
Radu Apostoleanu
Hi everyone,
This is Radu from the JSM Assets team. Thank you for your feedback currentReporter() scope function. To set the right expectations, we will not be addressing this feature in the near term. You can check our new feature policy for more information on how we decide what we implement.
This feature is working as intended given that currentReporter() relates to the scope of creation for the Jira issue. For example a customer may create an issue on behalf of someone else so at that point the currentReporter() would move the the creator of the issue rather than the reporter noted on the ticket. Furthermore the execution of currentReporter() function requires an active creation scope to retrieve the value, given the automation rule triggers after the creation even and after that scope is closed the currentReporter is not available for processing.
We will be updating our documentation to clarify and be explicit that currentReporter() is not equal to the issue Reporter.
Thank you again for your feedback.
Best,
Radu Apostoleanu