Is the "Edit mode" in a Workflow in another browser tab really preventing a Workflow to be active?

[Sven]

In Jira Premium Cloud, on production, when I try to add a status to a workflow I (possibly) made the mendable mistake to have a tab open under the following example link (not giving you the real link for security reasons):
https://{instance_name}.atlassian.net/plugins/servlet/project-config/{project_key}/workflows

This links corresponds to going through the following steps to get to it:

Projects > Choose the projects in question from the Dropdown > Project settings (The cog icon) > Workflows > Under "Actions" clicked the "Pencil icon" (stands for Edit)

Then this automatically creates a draft, which might be counter-intuitive to a relatively new user. I just did that to check the diagram of the WF and nothing more. Then I moved to the other tab where I created a new workflow based on this old one (I copied the name), found it in the General Settings > Issues > Workflows, then More > Copy and renamed it.

However, on publishing the new workflow. I did not notice that, but I was told by my seniors later that the old one has remained active one because I possibly edited something during the Acknowledgement of the changes of the new workflow. When redoing it, I noticed I am going unintended into "Edit mode" when I click the pencil icon in order to copy the WF name easily from the "Project Settings", so that I can search for it in the "General Settings" to copy and then rename it with incremental version number. Therefore, I assumed this might be the moment where the unintended edit action took place, that my colleague referred to. Notice, that after clicking the pencil icon I did not publish and I did not change anything, I just copied the name because in that view it was easier for me.

After publishing the new WF in another tab, despite I did not see any evidence in the logs later, and I saw it myself that the new workflow was indeed active, it was insisted that the old workflow was actually the active one, while the new one the inactive one, which shouldn't be so, because I double-checked in the "Active"\Inactive WFs in the "General Settings" -> Workflows.  Do you think that it is that this other tab where I did not publish any changes kept the WF I need as inactive, despite what I saw and double-checked?

To sum-up, or put it otherwise, the question comes down to this:

Is the "Edit" mode in of a Workflow in another tab really preventing a newer copy of that old and set as inactive Workflow to be active?

But I am also curious, whether I am obliged to keep only the browser tab open where I am editing only the new workflow when I am working on workflows?

Wouldn't it be good to get notified, if there's some other active window somewhere, after acknowledging the WF changes and the progress bar starts running or before running the publishing process?

And I am curious to get to hear from experienced Jira admins, how do you go about tabs management, do you tend to keep less tabs, even when you actually need many tabs open? Or would you rather sacrifice all tabs in such a case? I always group them and organise them meticulously by colours and named groups, so I am curious to hear the opinion of the wider public. :)

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Welcome to the Atlassian Community!

What's happening here is that you are creating two workflows.  It's nothing to do with the browser.  Your actions are summarised by:

• You have a workflow called workflow-1
• You create a draft change to it (workflow-1-draft)
• You then copy workflow-1 to workflow-2
• Then you save the draft of workflow-1

The draft is not a drafted change for workflow-2, it's only for workflow-1.  Workflow-2 is now a separate entity.

Active workflows are workflows that are in use in projects.  There is no active/inactive switch, it's just an indicator of if the workflow is used.

If you want to use workflow 2, go to the project you want to use it in and map it to the issue type(s) you want to use it for.

[Sven]

Thank you for the answer Nic, the question is, did having the original workflow (#1) open in another tab caused it to stay active?

Because that was what was insisted and I saw the #2 active and I am quite sure about it, I just did not think I would need a screenshot as a proof, so I did not do.  

That is why, I also asked, am I obliged to keep only the browser tab open where I am editing only the new workflow when I am working on workflows?

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

No.  As I said, the "active" display just tells you that you have one or more projects configured to use it.

The tabs have nothing to do with it.

[Sven]

Thank you @Nic Brough -Adaptavist- . And how do you feel about working with many open browser tabs, does that bother you? I often get criticized on this and I feel that isn't a critic backed with facts, because having tabs opened never caused me to make a mistake. Quite the contrary... needing to remember all that I multi-task and to reopen again and again causes mistakes. Do you have a hint for me how one deals with such criticism at work? Just asking for some workplace advice with this :) 

[Sven]

I'd leave the question open, so that other Jira admins could share their opinions too.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Some people do not like lots of tabs, and struggle with the overload of things on-screen and distraction.

Others work well with lots of tabs.  I am one of them - to me, they're effectively a to-do list for my current screen-time.  At the moment, I've got 20 community posts open to work through reading and maybe responding to, a passport application, a doc on a docker problem with a database server, and a backup thing - those are the things I need to deal with today.  I'll close them when done, open more if I find more needs doing.

When I'm criticised, I just ask why the other person thinks what I'm doing is a problem (obviously, most criticism is explained), and usually end up having to gently point out that people work and think differently.  What works for me won't work for other people.

What are people saying is wrong with having loads of tabs open?

[Sven]

They imply I messed it up by keeping an open browser tab of the workflow, after I clicked the pencil icon in the Workflows in that tab which I never went back to again until I closed, despite not changing anything and not publishing that v2 workflow. I made a copy of that v2 workflow, renamed it to v3 and changed it further in another tab and never went back to that v2 workflow tab until I closed it. 

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Ok, well, feel free to show them my explanation of what happened here.

It very clearly has nothing to do with many tabs being open.  It was purely because you didn't see that you had created a new independent workflow in another tab.

[Sven]

But does clicking the Pencil icon actually create a new workflow even if I never publish it?

I associated the v3 with the scheme and then v2 was not associated anymore, I am pretty sure about that. It was then when I was told that the v2 was active. 

And the weirdest thing... the screenshot I received, why #1 says it is active and down there #2 says the opposite?

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

No.  The pencil is a "go into edit mode" function.  It will not create a new workflow.  If you publish a workflow, then your changes overwrite the workflow you edited.

I can't find a way to get that display, I think I'd need to see the full text of that line to try to identify where it is coming from.

I think you still have the problem that you are creating new workflows, not editing existing ones.  Workflows do not have versions, that must be something you are doing.  

If you click "edit draft" in here, then you can change the current workflow.  When you do that, are you putting a version number in the title?

[Sven]

Yes, exactly, the v2 comes from the end of the name :) I then copy the old one and edit the newly created copy, appending v3 in the end. I thought everybody does it this way, when implementing some changes. 

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

Thought so.  You are creating new workflows, not editing the existing ones.