change status of linked issues with an automation rule

[Jannes]

I have 2 NG-Projects

1. Project "overview" with
         epic "new room" with
           story "new chair" linked as cloned by epci "new chair"

2. Project "new room" with
         epic "new chair" linked as clones the story "new chair"

I have an automation rule which shall change the staus from the linked issue.

Trigger (Issues staus change)
IF (Issue has linked Issues like "cloned by" or clones)
For linked Issues (type = "clones" or "cloned by")
then change Issue-Status to Trigger-Issue-Status

I get following Problem in the audit log of the rule:
"target status could not be found. If you use Smart-Value, be sure that these are solved as numeric status is"
Bad translation, but i hope you see the core of the problem.

imho:
The rule fins the linked issue but cannot change the status, cause epics and storys have different status ids.

How do i use numeric status ids and is my assumption correct?

[Flavien Gache · Accepted solution]

Is there any difference in your two workflows. Let me explain.

If you have one workflow with 3 different statuses (for the parent task for example) and another workflow (for the linked issue), I would try to investigate the workflows. 

Maybe your first issue type can transit through some statuses that are not implemented in the workflow of the child task. 

Your parent task and child task need to have the same range of different status available I think.

[Jannes]

Thats the problem, thank you!

Solution: not one rule for all status, three rules for the important changes.
1. When an issue changes to "To Do" then change linked Issue to "To Do"
2. When an issue changes to "In Progress" then change linked Issue to "In Progress"
3. When an issue changes to "Done" then change linked Issue to "Done"

[Bill Sheboy]

Hi @Jannes -- Welcome to the Atlassian Community!

You can still do this with one rule using If/Else condition, and continue to add tests for each status change.  That would be easier to maintain, such as reducing the risk of errors when you make a change to one of the rules.

Best regards,

Bill