Isolate labels between different fields

[Ryan Peacock]

I'm looking to set up a Jira project to aid in handling production and maintenance issues for specialized hardware devices. This hardware is expected to come back multiple times over its lifetime for scheduled maintenance.

So far the closest format that seems applicable is the Bug Tracker template in Jira Software, ironically enough (though with some moderate alteration). The table format is hands-off enough and overview-focused to avoid requiring too much involvement from users, who may be hesitant to put things in a tracker.

However, we need to be able to consistently group issues that apply to the same device(s) together. An issue could apply to multiple devices exhibiting the same problem at the same time.

So far I'm thinking this should be a custom Labels type field to represent the device ID. However, in testing this I've noticed that the stock "Labels" field overlaps with the available labels. If an issue is applied a label for a general topic in the Labels field, and then the user starts trying to type in a device ID in its field, they'll see previously-applied labels from the Labels field as autocompletions for the device ID field.

This overlap seems problematic and likely to be confusing to the people who are intended to use the project, who are largely unfamiliar with issue trackers. Is there any way around this? Any alternative way to represent this field?

• I've considered Epics, but those are typically a one-time deal, and ill-suited for hardware that is expected to come back several years later.
• I've considered a pure text field, but lack of autocompletion means likely a lot of similar-but-not-quite-equal entries with formatting the ID, delimiter for multiple entries, etc.
• I've considered Components, but due to the sheer number of devices this would be very unwieldy and tedious.

---

UPDATE: It seems a custom labels field won't work either, as we need to have this field show up in the issue table. Turns out Jira doesn't support custom fields being shown on the issue overview table, only in details, and it appears that isn't likely to change anytime soon.

So far my only option is to use the default "Labels" field and try to make sure everyone knows that's where the device ID goes. I can't modify it as it's a system default field. This is not a good solution, but it's all I can do.

UPDATE 2: If anyone has a better solution, I would much appreciate it. Current options are not suitable for long-term.

[Mark Higgins]

Hi Ryan,

Have you looked into using Components, that would allow you to control what was in your list, and then allow people, to select the Component when required, without creating a larger list?

Another thought, as you using Assets, which would allow you to track the actual asset.

Hope this helps, and feel free to tell me I've missed the point :-)

Cheers

mark

[Ryan Peacock]

I considered components, but there are currently over 1000 of these devices already sold and in use. Creating a new one every time a new device is built (2-3 times each week) would be very irritating to keep up with as well, especially since most devices don't exibit issues worth tracking.

I don't know about the Assets system, can that be added to a Bug Tracker format project?

[Ryan Peacock]

Looking at the Asset Creation project template, it seems Assets are just another rank-0 issue type; in which case Epics would be more appropriate at rank +1.