Why would "links" synchronizer with "remove" option move issues instead of removing them?

[Laura Savičienė]

I have the following synchronizer:

Links (Parent-Child Relationship [for Structure synchronization only])
Parent issue is parent of sub-issue
Sync issues in structure and all sub-issues linked from them
Remove sub-issues with no incoming links
Links primacy

The structure is created entirely from links. Issue HX207-1 several levels down the structure and has it's children with their own sub-children. Then the link between HX207-1 and it's parent issue is deleted. The links between HX207-1 and it's children are retained.

But instead of removing the whole subtree of HX207-1, as I would expect from the synchronizer description ("When Remove option is selected, the issue is removed from the structure (possibly with its own sub-issues)."), it is moved to the top level of the structure (copied from Activity stream):

Synchronizer "Links (Parent-Child Relationship [for Structure synchronization only])" on behalf of Laura Savičienė moved HX207-1 and 7 sub-issues in DP000 - <...>
from DP000-1 / DP300-1 / DP300-2 to the top level of the structure

What should I do to get the issue in question removed not moved (via synchronizers, without manually deleting)?
My other idea was to filter it out, because the issue has a specific status, but that doesn't work either (see comment in https://answers.atlassian.com/questions/13829211)

[Eugene Sokhransky _ALM Works_ · Accepted solution]

Hi Laura,

This is expected behaviour as the child issue, which you unlinked, has a number of its own sub-issues linked to it.

If it had none - it would have been removed.

Could you please create a support ticket in our JIRA so we can discuss all the details there and come up with a configuration that works as you need: http://almworks.com/structure/support-request

Thanks,

Eugene (ALM Works)

[Laura Savičienė]

Hello Eugene, Thank You for the answer. No need for the support ticket, after Your explanation, I figured out how to achieve it in a different way - I just created a filter synchronizer which removes the issue (as I said before, I can identify it via status) together with it's descendants (with structure JQL query). I still think that filter explanation "possibly with its own sub-issues" is misleading. Of course, "possibly" is not a commitment, but it would be nice to add something along the lines of "only if it is not linked to other issues in structure". Thanks again, Laura

[Eugene Sokhransky _ALM Works_]

Hello Laura, That's one of the options. So apart from the fact that it's unlinked, its status also changes? I believe this is related to your other question? Thanks, Eugene