in addition to it there is no message appearing on validation, there should be an option to add a custom message incase validation fails.

Hey all, I'm Peter, one of the devs on Assets.

Thanks everyone for indicating the importance of this ticket and providing context around your use cases.

I'm happy to say that we've just rolled out the fix that this ticket refers to: specifically, Assets field values are now correctly populated in Jira Expressions for all transitions (create issue and transition issue screens). This should fix custom validators built using JMWE that refer to Assets custom fields, as well as any other apps that make use of Jira Expressions on transitions.

I notice that there is also a desire for a more powerful piece of functionality here, which is being able to determine more details about the Assets field values during workflow transitions (currently we only provide the object ID via Jira Expressions). I've created a new feature request ticket here to track that: https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JSDCLOUD-14790 If that's something you're interested in, please vote!

Hello b27a87ac4ce8 
 
Thank you for your feedback! I appreciate you taking the time to share your insights and use cases. You've highlighted an important issue and I can totally see the value this can bring; however, the current scope of this bug fix is specifically aimed at addressing the validator issue when using object IDs in Jira expressions, which is the only identifier supported currently. As we resolve this ticket, we'll create a new ticket to track and explore your suggestion further, please keep the conversation going on the new ticket.

Thanks 🙏
Mohamed Hassan | Product Manager, JSM Assets

Hello 90325da67d46 ,

could you please check if this bug could be fixed, it is limiting our work and i think for many other customers too.
And please remove the "Workaround", because there is no workaround....

The main functionality we need is a validator on assets objects in customfields against AQL.

All of the usecases described are currently NOT working, because of this silly bug / missing feature.

A validator on an asset attribute would be particularly useful at steps where you need to ensure specific conditions are met before proceeding to the next stage of the workflow. Here are some scenarios within the workflows where validators on asset attributes could be beneficial:

1. Employee Onboarding and Offboarding

• Asset Allocation: During the allocation of assets (e.g., laptops), a validator can ensure that the asset meets specified criteria before it's assigned to the employee. For example, ensuring the laptop model meets the minimum hardware requirements or verifying that the asset is not already allocated to another employee.

• Asset Collection: When collecting assets from an offboarding employee, a validator can check if all assigned assets are returned in acceptable condition. This could involve validating the physical condition of the asset (e.g., no physical damage beyond normal wear and tear) or verifying that all accessories (chargers, peripherals) are returned.

2. Purchase Item Request and Approval

• Request Initiation: When an employee submits a purchase request, a validator can ensure that the requested item meets predefined criteria such as budget limits, compatibility with existing systems, or compliance with company policies. For example, ensuring that the requested software is compatible with the company's operating systems.

• Asset Registration: After receiving purchased items, a validator can verify that each item is properly registered in the asset management system. This could involve checking that all necessary information (e.g., serial numbers, purchase date) is recorded accurately.

3. Asset Maintenance and Repair

• Issue Reporting: When an asset issue is reported, a validator can validate the reported issue against known issues or required diagnostics before proceeding with repair approval. For example, ensuring that the reported issue is consistent with known hardware faults.

• Repair Execution: Before completing a repair, a validator can verify that the asset has undergone necessary tests and inspections to ensure the issue is resolved. This could involve validating test results or confirming that the asset meets quality standards before being returned to service.

4. Periodic Asset Audits

• Audit Execution: During the physical verification of assets, a validator can validate the accuracy of asset records against physical inventory. For example, ensuring that the asset tag matches the recorded information in the asset management system.

• Discrepancy Reporting: When discrepancies are reported during an audit, a validator can verify the nature of the discrepancy and provide guidance on corrective actions. This could involve validating documentation or confirming the chain of custody for assets.

5. IT Asset Lifecycle Management

• Asset Acquisition: During the acquisition of new IT assets, a validator can validate purchase orders against approved budgets or vendor agreements. This ensures that acquisitions comply with financial controls and purchasing policies.

• Maintenance and Upgrades: Before approving maintenance tasks or upgrades, a validator can verify that the proposed changes align with asset management policies and operational requirements. For example, validating upgrade plans against compatibility matrices or lifecycle management policies.

In each of these workflow steps, validators on asset attributes help enforce consistency, compliance, and accuracy, reducing errors and ensuring that assets are managed effectively throughout their lifecycle in Jira Cloud.

It is not a full workaround, but a small workaround that David Fischer mentions in https://ecosystem.atlassian.net/browse/ACJIRA-2549.

It is applicable to check whether the assets field is empty or not.

Hello,

why is this ticket marked as 'Resolution: unresolved?' 

This is a bug that causes enormous frustration and inefficient use of company time. 

Since Jira is meant to make company processes more streamlined and efficient, the priority should be higher! And not on a backlog.

Awaiting an update and your reply soon.

Thanks

so frustratingly typical Atlassian...

Seemingly ordinary use case and once again i stumble on an X year old bug....

this is a bug, it shouldn't be concidered, it should be fixed!! 

Hi Team,

Can we expect the resolution to be delivered by the middle or end of September by any chance?

Please let me know.

Thanks,

Surya

Hi Team 👋 ,

Thank you for bringing this bug to our attention.

We have added this bug to our backlog, however, due to other roadmap items and work capacity, we are unable to provide an ETA on this bug.

We will continue to monitor the impact and will communicate an update as soon as we are able to schedule this work.

Thank you again for providing valuable feedback to our team!

Mohamed Hassan | JSM Assets Product Team

Hi team,

Are there any updates? Please review this bug ASAP.

Thanks,

Surya.