Uploaded image for project: 'Migration Platform'
  1. Migration Platform
  2. MIG-926

Support the migration of Automation for Jira (A4J) rules with JCMA

XMLWordPrintable

    • 248

    • Our product teams collect and evaluate feedback from a number of different sources. To learn more about how we use customer feedback in the planning process, check out our new feature policy.

      Issue Summary

      JCMA doesn't migrate 'Project automation rules' created using A4J while migrating Jira Software/JSM projects and only migrates the legacy automation rules included in JSM by default.

      Steps to Reproduce

      1. Migrate JSW/JSM project with Project automation rules configured by A4J
      2. Project automation rules will not be migrated to the cloud

      Expected Results

      Project automation rules should be migrated to the cloud

      Actual Results

      Project automation rules fails to migrate to cloud

      Workaround

      Project automation can be manually migrated using import-and-export-jira-automation-rules

            [MIG-926] Support the migration of Automation for Jira (A4J) rules with JCMA

            Ciocirlan, Costel-Iulian added a comment -

            There is indeed the export/import option workaround, the main issue with this is the issue mappings for issue statuses, issue types, custom fields, and the project IDs which are not being mapped with the default functionality when using the export from DC/import to Cloud option.
            The worst thing about this is that Atlassian can actually help only if you complain a lot, this is what we did in our migration where we have tested for several months and bumped into a lot of issues...

            So just for everyone to know, there is a script that they can run on the JSON file that you are exporting from DC - give it to them and ask them to fix the IDs for the mapping and they will come back with the updated JSON file, which you should import in your Cloud site.
            If they will say that there is no such thing (because I would expect this from Atlassian), have them contact our Cloud migration manager sreekrishna@atlassian.com and the engineer who worked on this is bbabu@atlassian.com so they can align and just do their job and support you!

            Sharing this because I know how much of a pain this issue with the automations was for us, aside from so many other issues!

            Ciocirlan, Costel-Iulian added a comment - There is indeed the export/import option workaround, the main issue with this is the issue mappings for issue statuses, issue types, custom fields, and the project IDs which are not being mapped with the default functionality when using the export from DC/import to Cloud option. The worst thing about this is that Atlassian can actually help only if you complain a lot, this is what we did in our migration where we have tested for several months and bumped into a lot of issues... So just for everyone to know, there is a script that they can run on the JSON file that you are exporting from DC - give it to them and ask them to fix the IDs for the mapping and they will come back with the updated JSON file, which you should import in your Cloud site. If they will say that there is no such thing (because I would expect this from Atlassian), have them contact our Cloud migration manager sreekrishna@atlassian.com and the engineer who worked on this is bbabu@atlassian.com so they can align and just do their job and support you! Sharing this because I know how much of a pain this issue with the automations was for us, aside from so many other issues!

            Sami Ahmed Shaik added a comment -

            https://support.atlassian.com/requests/MOVE-1764364/

            Sami Ahmed Shaik added a comment - https://support.atlassian.com/requests/MOVE-1764364/

            Sami Shaik added a comment -

            Our migration is blocked because this feature is not available in the JCMA.

            Sami Shaik added a comment - Our migration is blocked because this feature is not available in the JCMA.

            Prasanth added a comment -

            https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-1759883

            Prasanth added a comment - https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-1759883

            Jan Eelco Hoekstra added a comment -

            At least document the format changes. Having a list of changed formats, for example the changes in the format of headers on outgoing webhooks
            This makes it possible to write scripts to reformat rule json to the cloud format.
            The error messages from the importer are not really helpful, because in the case of false headers formatting on outgoing webhooks, point to somewhere in the string, bud not to the real problem:

            Server:

            "headers": [{
                    "id": "_header_1615780177907",
                    "name": "Secret",
                    "value": {
                        "keyOrValue":"hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",
                        "secret": false
                    }
                }],

            Cloud:

            "headers": [{
                    "id": "_header_1615780177907",
                    "name": "Secret",
                    "value":"",
                    "keyOrValue": "hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",
                    "secret": false
                }],

             note here that "value":

            {                         "keyOrValue":"hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",                         "secret": false                     }

            changed to: "value":"",                     "keyOrValue": "hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",                     "secret": false

            The errormessage from the importer points however to position 162 of the whole string (above is only the changed part shown), which is in the middle of the word 'description' of the json export and therefore not helpfull.

            Jan Eelco Hoekstra added a comment - At least document the format changes. Having a list of changed formats, for example the changes in the format of headers on outgoing webhooks This makes it possible to write scripts to reformat rule json to the cloud format. The error messages from the importer are not really helpful, because in the case of false headers formatting on outgoing webhooks, point to somewhere in the string, bud not to the real problem: Server: "headers" : [{                     "id" : "_header_1615780177907" ,                     "name" : "Secret" ,                     "value" : {                         "keyOrValue" : "hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49" ,                         "secret" : false                     }                 }], Cloud: "headers" : [{                     "id" : "_header_1615780177907" ,                     "name" : "Secret" ,                     "value" :"",                     "keyOrValue" : "hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49" ,                     "secret" : false                 }],  note here that "value": {                         "keyOrValue":"hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",                         "secret": false                     } changed to: "value":"",                     "keyOrValue": "hhjksafvn838vflwrb845vtlocbo845ucbo45bco8u45cc49",                     "secret": false The errormessage from the importer points however to position 162 of the whole string (above is only the changed part shown), which is in the middle of the word 'description' of the json export and therefore not helpfull.

            Prasanth K P added a comment -

            https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-1736383

            Prasanth K P added a comment - https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-1736383

            David Moreno added a comment -

            We are affected because this feature is not enabled in the migrator after more than 2 years hence we have to migrate the rules manually (not acceptable). I hope that in a near future your colleagues can benefit of this feature.

            David Moreno added a comment - We are affected because this feature is not enabled in the migrator after more than 2 years hence we have to migrate the rules manually (not acceptable). I hope that in a near future your colleagues can benefit of this feature.

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment -

            https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-150958 

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment - https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-150958  

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment -

            https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-150959 

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment - https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-150959  

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment -

            https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-148703 

            Rananjay Pathania added a comment - https://getsupport.atlassian.com/browse/MOVE-148703  

              6dd2ec62243b Adithya Ramesh
              ssingh4 Saurabh Singh (Inactive)
              Votes:
              100 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              117 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: