Uploaded image for project: 'Jira Service Management Cloud'
  1. Jira Service Management Cloud
  2. JSDCLOUD-15069

Edit Request Type action is not working when they have duplicate names and one of them is hidden from the portal

XMLWordPrintable

      Issue Summary

      The "Edit Request Type" action is not working when have duplicate names in the Request Types and one of them is hidden from portal.

      Steps to Reproduce

      1. Create a request type with a duplicate name.
      2. Add one of these request types to the 'Hidden from portal' group.
      3. Use an automation rule to edit the request type, regardless of its visibility in the portal.
      4. The automation rule will result in an error."

      Expected Results

      Change the request type successfully.

      Actual Results

      When the automation triggers the edit request type action, it will fail with the error below

      Edit request typeThe request type couldn't be edited, because the chosen request type isn't based on this issue type.Submit a request or incident

      As I demonstrate on the screen recording below:

      Workaround

      At the moment, as a workaround, you can either change the request type to a similar, but unique, name or ensure that both request types are visible in the portal.

        1. Screenshot 2024-10-09 at 11.17.11 AM.png
          Screenshot 2024-10-09 at 11.17.11 AM.png
          574 kB
        2. Screenshot 2024-10-09 at 11.18.20 AM.png
          Screenshot 2024-10-09 at 11.18.20 AM.png
          579 kB

            [JSDCLOUD-15069] Edit Request Type action is not working when they have duplicate names and one of them is hidden from the portal

            Terry A Davidson added a comment -

            If you aren't considering this as a bug, can you consider it as a feature request?

            I am wondering if my request to at least allow a method to archive unused Request Types was considered.    

            Terry A Davidson added a comment - If you aren't considering this as a bug, can you consider it as a feature request? I am wondering if my request to at least allow a method to archive unused Request Types was considered.    

            Gyorgy Dani-Rauf added a comment -

            Hi d5e97a3bd9ce,

            How is this not a bug?

            When you have two different request type with the same name, but with obviously different ID they are not the same, so it should be treated as different if there is an option to change the request type via automation it should not rely on the name but on the ID instead.

            If there are no restrictions that prevents the creation of request type with the same name that already exists - even if it is mapped to a different issue type - then this should be considered as a bug, because the name is not unique, though the ID has to be.

            Can this be revisited please?

            Gyorgy Dani-Rauf added a comment - Hi d5e97a3bd9ce , How is this not a bug? When you have two different request type with the same name, but with obviously different ID they are not the same, so it should be treated as different if there is an option to change the request type via automation it should not rely on the name but on the ID instead. If there are no restrictions that prevents the creation of request type with the same name that already exists - even if it is mapped to a different issue type - then this should be considered as a bug, because the name is not unique, though the ID has to be. Can this be revisited please?

            Terry A Davidson added a comment -

            As you look into this situation, might I suggest that the ability to archive a request type be considered?  In my case, I wasn't sure if the original request type might still be in use within Jira, so I didn't want to delete it, so I just hid it.  It would be nice if you could tag request types as inactive....and not interfere with active request types that might have the same exact name. 

             

             

            Terry A Davidson added a comment - As you look into this situation, might I suggest that the ability to archive a request type be considered?  In my case, I wasn't sure if the original request type might still be in use within Jira, so I didn't want to delete it, so I just hid it.  It would be nice if you could tag request types as inactive....and not interfere with active request types that might have the same exact name.     

              Unassigned Unassigned
              8987963cd16f Bruno Altenhofen
              Affected customers:
              0 This affects my team
              Watchers:
              8 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: