Can't add components to a ticket by automation rule without overwriting old components

[Dinara Imambayeva]

I have created an automation rule. It should add components to a ticket. But I can't choose to add existing components and a new component, so the existing components are constantly overwritten by new, when automation rule is applied. 

I found on here  that there is the possibility to do so, but from some reason I can choose either add existing components or add a new component in my automation rule.

May be anyone had already had this problem and knows how to handle it

[Walter Buggenhout]

Hi @Dinara Imambayeva and welcome to the Community!

This support article describes how you can work around the issue. It is basically by adding the new component and also copying the ones that are already there. It looks like this in the example they mention:

Hope this helps!

[Dinara Imambayeva]

Hi @Walter Buggenhout , thank you for your answer! It is the article that I've already found. If I choose "copy from issue" there is no more possibility to choose a new coponent and vice versa. I can add either "copy from issue" or a new component, that actually doesn't really make sense.

[Walter Buggenhout]

No, it doesn't. I overlooked the fact that you are trying to update your components while creating an issue. Why don't you add all components in 1 step instead of editing your issue twice? You should be able to add more than one component in a single action.

Like this:

[Dinara Imambayeva]

There are the support tickets so they are created outside of our team. The idea is kinda to sort them by components for easier work for our support team. 

I can add more components by the option set value, but I can't define every combination of components, it would be just too much work. And I can choose the option copy from issue, but not them together, so I can't add a new component to the already exsting.

[Walter Buggenhout]

That sounds like a great idea. But as you explain it, it sounds like you are trying to automate something that is to complex to automate - possibly because you would like to capture every possible use case (or combination).

Here's 2 possible workarounds:

• Instead of trying to automate the components from what people type in the summary, why not letting them select one/more component/s on the request form when they create a request?
• If that's not possible (for whatever reason), then why not letting your agents triage the issues first and have them select the appropriate components after reading the ticket? You could still try to add e.g. 1 main component automatically based on clear criteria such as the one you have in your screenshot.

[Dinara Imambayeva]

There are definitely good cases that you've proposed. The same thought my team, so these two possibilities are already implemented :) We just wanted to automate those processes and match all the components.

The only "solution" now we see, to run the rule only by those tickets without defined components or not to use it at all. 

[Walter Buggenhout]

I'm sure you'll get to something that works for you and your team! 🚀

[Andreas Lärkfeldt]

@Walter Buggenhout The original suggestion (suggested by you doesn't work).

Yes we would of course work as you mentioned, but the option "Copy from issue" doesn't exist anymore. (you can see that there have been som changes to Automation - at least in "Cloud". The naming of the field has changed from Component(s) -> Component etc ...).

So sadly the option for "Copy from issue" does not exist anymore. So do we need to report to Atlassian or do you have another workaround?

[Walter Buggenhout]

Hi @Andreas Lärkfeldt, yes it does. Simply click on the ... button right next to the field and select COPY instead of SET. Then you are able to select the source issue you want to copy from:

 

[Andreas Lärkfeldt]

Also - cause you probably need a usecase (everyone is always trying to solve someone elses problem - but beeing the one that usually do that :P then ... please don't! We need a solution to do thos).

We need a hierarchy of Components (preferably - we dont want labels or a custom field). And if a lower level component is added, then we want Components to be autopopulated with higher level components.

Example: Schemes (lower level), Jira (higher level)

Someone is responsible for Schemes components, but someone is responsible for the entire Jira. And Jira already have a priority order for which component should have presedence. :)

[Andreas Lärkfeldt]

COPY doesnt work - cause when do we set "new components" then? (there is a glitch)

Copy components from the existing issue - yes it copies the existing components. But without adding the new one.

Adding the new one first using Set - and then Copy? Then it only copies the one we just set :D

Catch 22

We need "Copy from issue" + new component

@Walter Buggenhout 

[Walter Buggenhout]

You are right that you cannot do these two things in one single action. But nothing is stopping you from adding 2 edit issue actions to your automation rule: one to copy the components and an extra one to add the new component.

[Andreas Lärkfeldt]

Doing so will cause conflict - the automation will override each other out.

Example:

Issue have component "Schemes".

We SET component "Jira".

We then copy from existing issue. However this only copies the existing values - meaning only the newly set component "Jira". The initial component "Schemes" is now lost for now and forever.

If we do it the other way around:

We copy the value for the existing issue. Meaning it will only copy "Schemes".

Then SET component "Jira". This will overwrite "Schemes".

So how is your approach on this?

[Andreas Lärkfeldt]

No response to this @Walter Buggenhout ?

Does this mean that no one have a solution to this?

[Tsu Fukuda]

I would love to have the answer to this topic.  There use to be an option to add to existing labels, but it's gone.