1c96672eaa97 I would add that the reporter and all request participants from the source ticket be added as request participants on the target, unless they are already present, or if one is the reporter on the target ticket.  Coming from Spiceworks, the way they handle merging is similar, but they also merge comments in-line to the target ticket, which can be confusing if ticket comments are conversational, and overlap in time between the two tickets.

Internally, we were discussing this lately since somebody came with the idea that it might be possible via REST API. Which is not the case.
However, I wanted to share how we thought that it would be good:

1. Trigger: In context menü of to be merged issue click on "merge this issue into..." and select the target issue. (maybe with forced input of reason)
2. create a comment in target issue with date and time of source issue creation with hint to merge and original issue and the content of the description
3. move all comments from source to target issue
4. change description of source issue to "@person merged ticket XYZ-123 into XYZ-2342 because reason"
5. set source issue to done with resolution merged (this may be configurable or selectable but preselected in 1)
6. create issue link XYZ-123 merged into XYZ-2342

Replys to source isssue must automatically be rerouted to target issue.

Jira would need the internal possibility to create comments with different timestamp and on behalf of others (which also would be great for migration scenarios ^^) and to move comments from one issue to another. 

Many years later in a new company, I return to Jira Cloud, actively drive its use and again encounter this problem... So many years have passed and Atlassian still ignores it... Just great!

If Jira wants to be a serious competitor to other customer or user support platforms, they need to implement features such as these that exist in competitor's products. 

This ticket isn't even 10 years old yet. By Atlassian standards, we still have many years to wait.

But honestly, at this point, I have no one to blame but myself.

After the custom url ticket disaster, I don't know why I still expect them to do basic ticket requests.  

The number of duplicates we are getting is now growing and the team and our customers are complaining about it. 

This is a frustrating omission, especially given how often the email handler gets confused and creates duplicate tickets. Linking tickets and then having to update both (or all 3 or 4) is inefficient and it's confusing for the customer and the Helpdesk team.

I agree that issue merge is needed. If JSM is used as a main IT ticketing system, this needs to be added. It is a very basic function of a good ticketing system. 

+1 do add this feature.

This is such a basic feature for any service desk, I have customers who are getting frustrated that this is not a feature we can provide.

This could lead to us choosing another service desk provider as our customer base grows.

+1

How can Atlassian say JSM is a service desk when we are not even allowed to merge two tickets? What happens when a customer opens the same ticket for the same request 2 or 3 times? Are we just supposed to have links to every ticket? That is stupid!! Other true ticketing systems allow you to merge tickets. Come on Atlassian. Get your act together.