Difference in field visibility between licensed and customers in Portal?

[Stefan Schumacher]

Hi,

I've been setting up request types for use in the portal. After wondering why customers skip the "Affected Service", I made an inquiry and found out that this field is not visible for customers in the portal. 

When I open the same request type through the portal (as a licensed user), I can see the field.

Has this something to do with the fact that this field is "locked"? And how can I make this field visible for customers?

Regards,

Stefan

[Pramodh M · Accepted solution]

It needs license and only be filled by JSM agents @Stefan Schumacher 

Here's a reference

https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-Service-Management/quot-Affected-Services-quot-field-are-not-showed-to-customers/qaq-p/1608460

Thanks,

Pramodh

[Mikael Sandberg · Accepted solution]

As @Pramodh M mentioned the affected services field is only visible to JSM agents. The workaround is to use either the components field or a custom field that is visible to the customers and then use Automation to set the Affected services field. 

[Sussi Åström]

@Mikael Sandberg how would you create a automation, that would copy the components to affected services?

[Mikael Sandberg]

@Sussi Åström Have a look at this KB, all you would do is change the lookup objects to use the components field to find the object.

[Sussi Åström]

@Mikael Sandberg thanks & please bare with me, as I'm still a newby to Atlassian products, and especially JSM. I looked through the link you suggested, but I don't have a "Lookup Objects" action in Automation. We are using Atlassian JSM Standard plan, so we have no Assets objects.  So, if you have anymore insight for me, on how to achieve what I need, would be much appreciated.

[Mikael Sandberg]

@Sussi Åström In that case you could use if/else conditions to set the affected services based on the components. Just be aware that Automations have a 65 components limit, so if you have more than that then you would have to have multiple rules.

[Sussi Åström]

@Mikael Sandberg thank you! I had tried that, before asking for help,  as I hadn't gotten it to work. Your comment helped confirm that I was on the right track and went to recheck my automation rule and retest it. Reason, I didn't get it to work, was a small error on my part. Now working as expected. Once again, thank you!

[Stefan Schumacher]

Thanks for the prompt help,

from further reading I understand that its working as designed, however this can turn out to be quite tricky.

What I couldn't find is a reference which fields are also affected by this behaviour, I guess its not every field thats labelled as "locked"?