Uploaded image for project: 'Migration Platform'
  1. Migration Platform
  2. MIG-47

Importing comments through Jira CSV importer do not create missing users and associates comments to importer

    • 5
    • Severity 3 - Minor
    • 3

      Issue Summary

      While importing comments through Jira CSV importer, if the user do the exists it does not create missing user and associates comments to the user that is performing CSV import

      CSV importer would create users on-the-go when it fails to map the content to an existing user. This works for fields such as "Assignee" or "Reporter".

      However, it has a different behavior when mapping Comments to users; the CSV importer somehow is not capable of creating users for this case (it can only map to existing users).

      Ultimately, if the CSV importer cannot create the user or cannot map the user, the CSV importer will associate those content with the user who is performing the import.

      Steps to Reproduce

      1. Import Jira CSV file, make sure there are comments in the CSV file

      Expected Results

      1. Comments are associated to the right user

      Actual Results

      If user is not present, comment is associated to the user performing CSV import

      The below exception is thrown in the xxxxxxx.log file:

      2019-06-24 20:40:32,323 WARN - Commenter named ron.shafii not found. Creating issue with currently logged in user instead
      

      Notes

      Irreversible - we cannot associate comments to the correct user after it is associated to he user performing CSV import

      Workaround

      Import users before content.

       

      Short Term solution:

      Throw a pop-up recommending to import users before content

       

      Long Term solution:

      Create user, if they are not present - similar behaviour as in  "Assignee" or "Reporter"

            [MIG-47] Importing comments through Jira CSV importer do not create missing users and associates comments to importer

            Kamila Czubaj added a comment - - edited

            Hi all,

            Although we appreciate that this bug is not great in terms of User Experience, unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will address it in the near future.

            We are working on a new Importer for Jira (JWM, JSW, JSM, JPD) to solve many of the existing JIM bugs and provide a better experience while importing data. 

            We have already shipped it in JWM with more features to come soon: Import data from other tools into Jira Work Management 

            As a result, we decided to close this bug as Won't fix.

            Follow the updates on our public roadmap Cloud Roadmap

            Thank you again for providing valuable feedback to our team!
            Jira Cloud team

            Kamila Czubaj added a comment - - edited Hi all, Although we appreciate that this bug is not great in terms of User Experience, unfortunately, it is unlikely that we will address it in the near future. We are working on a new Importer for Jira (JWM, JSW, JSM, JPD) to solve many of the existing JIM bugs and provide a better experience while importing data.  We have already shipped it in JWM with more features to come soon: Import data from other tools into Jira Work Management   As a result, we decided to close this bug as Won't fix. Follow the updates on our public roadmap  Cloud Roadmap Thank you again for providing valuable feedback to our team! Jira Cloud team

            To say that you are continuing your culture of honesty, while at the same time choosing to let a known bug go ignored is hard for me to reconcile.  How is that a culture of honesty?  Your motiviation is not in your customer's interest if you are choosing to sweep this under the rug.  If you were a culture of honesty, you would have some big disclamer to those who are taking their valuable time to submit issues, troubleshoot them, and provide feedback.  Something like: "Hey everyone, just to be honest here, even if this is in fact a bug, there's a chance we will just decide we don't feel like fixing it, so be aware you could just be wasting your time even bothering to submit it"  Why would the community continue donating their time to improve your product when your company behaves in this manner?  And why would you want to close the bugs that are not resolved?  You can't focus on your upcomming roadmap because your system has too many bugs?  That statement doesn't even make sense, but even if so, the soution is to make some of the bugs go away???   Wow, just wow.  What harm is there in keeping them open, and having a full inventory of what is wrong with your product?  Please explain that to me?  Why not just keep bugs open until you are capable and have the resources of fixing them?  Do you have any idea how much difficulty i went through trying to migrate to your system because of this bug?  Wasted countless hours trying to get it to work properly for us.  Complete BS, that's what this is.  Even though this issue is no longer impacting me, witnessing this behaviour, and your lack of commitment to improving your product, makes me question a lot of earlier assumptions about your company in a not good way.   Possibly the first thing many new customers will have is to experience how broken and/or poorly designed your importer is, and then to find this bug, and see that it was closed on purpose without resolving?  That's not a good look.  Good luck to your organization with that kind of company culture.  

            Tim Turnbull added a comment - To say that you are continuing your culture of honesty, while at the same time choosing to let a known bug go ignored is hard for me to reconcile.  How is that a culture of honesty?  Your motiviation is not in your customer's interest if you are choosing to sweep this under the rug.  If you were a culture of honesty, you would have some big disclamer to those who are taking their valuable time to submit issues, troubleshoot them, and provide feedback.  Something like: "Hey everyone, just to be honest here, even if this is in fact a bug, there's a chance we will just decide we don't feel like fixing it, so be aware you could just be wasting your time even bothering to submit it"  Why would the community continue donating their time to improve your product when your company behaves in this manner?  And why would you want to close the bugs that are not resolved?  You can't focus on your upcomming roadmap because your system has too many bugs?  That statement doesn't even make sense, but even if so, the soution is to make some of the bugs go away???   Wow, just wow.  What harm is there in keeping them open, and having a full inventory of what is wrong with your product?  Please explain that to me?  Why not just keep bugs open until you are capable and have the resources of fixing them?  Do you have any idea how much difficulty i went through trying to migrate to your system because of this bug?  Wasted countless hours trying to get it to work properly for us.  Complete BS, that's what this is.  Even though this issue is no longer impacting me, witnessing this behaviour, and your lack of commitment to improving your product, makes me question a lot of earlier assumptions about your company in a not good way.   Possibly the first thing many new customers will have is to experience how broken and/or poorly designed your importer is, and then to find this bug, and see that it was closed on purpose without resolving?  That's not a good look.  Good luck to your organization with that kind of company culture.  

            Andrew T added a comment -
            Atlassian Update - September 22, 2023

            Hi everyone,

            Thank you for previously raising this bug and bringing it to our attention.

            Within our company roadmap and work capacity, we try to address or review each bug request but admit that not each one will be resolved. To continue the culture of being honest and open, we are closing this bug considering its priority and impact to focus on our upcoming roadmap for all customers.

            As we continue to roll out features we do look at requests made by our customers and if you feel like this bug is still impacting your team please let us know.

            Thank you again for providing valuable feedback to our team!

            Migrations team

            Andrew T added a comment - Atlassian Update - September 22, 2023 Hi everyone, Thank you for previously raising this bug and bringing it to our attention. Within our company roadmap and work capacity, we try to address or review each bug request but admit that not each one will be resolved. To continue the culture of being honest and open , we are closing this bug considering its priority and impact to focus on our upcoming roadmap for all customers. As we continue to roll out features we do look at requests made by our customers and if you feel like this bug is still impacting your team please let us know. Thank you again for providing valuable feedback to our team! Migrations team

            If you are importing just ticket id, summary, and comments, then the issue is even worse.  All comments are imported as the user performing the import.  Its as if the importer first builds a list of users associated with the import, and if not found in that list, defaults to the user performing the import.  So frustrating. 

            Tim Turnbull added a comment - If you are importing just ticket id, summary, and comments, then the issue is even worse.  All comments are imported as the user performing the import.  Its as if the importer first builds a list of users associated with the import, and if not found in that list, defaults to the user performing the import.  So frustrating. 

              Unassigned Unassigned
              bkalari Bhargavi Kalari
              Affected customers:
              4 This affects my team
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: