Using multiple processors

[Marc Mast]

Hi,

Is dit possible to use multiple processors?

If i configure the ALT(@) processor and the regexp processor my test case only uses the regexp processor.

My alt processor is using default Jira fields like @issuetype, @priority etc.

Regards,

Marc

[Andy Brook [Plugin People] · Accepted solution]

No, Field Processors are designed to be per-case. Selection of the processor is based on the result of an Election between enabled Processors. This is driven by the number of Directives found by each. Its not currently possible to run more than one.

With such complexity, the Regexp Field Processor is the way to go.

The Regexp Field Processor is a special case, and I think, what you may be seeing is that. Historically, the Regexp FP was also in the election, which sort of worked, but, the intent of the Regexp FP was to 'own' specific external addresses for income, so current releases skew the results, if the sender matches the Regexp FP sender address, then it 'owns' the mail, and the Directive detection doesnt apply.

I have had requests to make this configurable to allow reverting to the historical way this worked, I will be adding that into Regexp FP soon, will be 6.3+ compatible release.

[Andy Brook]

No, Field Processors are designed to be per-case. Selection of the processor is based on the result of an Election between enabled Processors. This is driven by the number of Directives found by each. Its not currently possible to run more than one.

With such complexity, the Regexp Field Processor is the way to go.

The Regexp Field Processor is a special case, and I think, what you may be seeing is that. Historically, the Regexp FP was also in the election, which sort of worked, but, the intent of the Regexp FP was to 'own' specific external addresses for income, so current releases skew the results, if the sender matches the Regexp FP sender address, then it 'owns' the mail, and the Directive detection doesnt apply.

I have had requests to make this configurable to allow reverting to the historical way this worked, I will be adding that into Regexp FP soon, will be 6.3+ compatible release.