Transition post-function for a Sub-Task

[Sadath Ali Syed]

We have a requirement where a sub-task of current issue should be transitioned. If a new sub-task is opened in the current issue with same EmpID, we want to close/transition the existing sub-task with same EmpID. We tried few JMWE post-funtions with no luck. We currently have JMWE, JSU and Project automation available. Any help with this issue will be highly appreciated.

[David Fischer · Accepted solution]

Hi @Sadath Ali Syed 

you can achieve this using JMWE. On the Create transition of your sub-task workflow, you should add a Transition Related Issues post-function, configured as follows:

• Transition(s): the Close transition to trigger on the other sub-task
• Target Issue(s): "Issues returned by the following Groovy script:"
• Groovy Script:

issue.parentObject?.subTaskObjects?.findAll{issue != it && it.get("EmpID") == issue.get("EmpID")}

[Sadath Ali Syed]

Thanks @David Fischer . JMWE rocks!

[Trudy Claspill]

Hello @Sadath Ali Syed 

What is "EmpID"? Is that a custom field? If so, what type of field is it?

I think it might be possible to do this with Automation, but to work out the details I need to know what EmpID is.

[Sadath Ali Syed]

@Trudy Claspill EmpID is a custom field of type 'Text Field (single line)'

[Trudy Claspill]

What type of data is entered in the field? Are spaces or non-alphanumeric characters ever included?

What version of Jira are you using and what version of Automation?

I work with Jira Cloud. I might be able to work out a solution in Automation there, but that doesn't guarantee that the same functionality would be supported on Jira Server Automation

[Sadath Ali Syed]

EmpIDs entered are alpha-numeric. Most of them enters it as abc123. However, few enter them as abc 123 (with space). We dont have validators/restrictions in place. Our Jira version is 8.13 server. Version of Automation for Jira is 7.3.3.

[Trudy Claspill]

How sophisticated do you expect the EmpID matching to be? Would you try to implement something that would consider "abc123" and "abc 123" to be a match? You might want to consider adding some validation to that field so that you are more likely to get conclusive matches.

[Sadath Ali Syed]

@Trudy Claspill - Thanks for your time. The solution David provided worked out for us.