Multiple Issues and Epic Synchronizer in Structure 3.x - intended behaviour?

[ups...@gmail.com]

In my company Structure has been updated from 2.11 to 3.2.1. I like the new feature of having the same issue multiple times in the same structure. But the behaviour in combination with an Epic synchronizer is not clear to me:

In our structures we use Epics only on the 1st level. Below the epics there is one or more levels of stories. Leafes of the tree are always tasks. I made the experience that users tend to forget to set the Epic Link field of stories and tasks to the corresponding Epic. But as we are using agile boards its important that this field is set correctly. Therefore in structure version 2.11 I've been using the epic link synchronizer which worked very well.

Epic 1

- Story 1

-- Task A (Epic Link automatically set to Epic 1)

-- Task B (Epic Link automatically set to Epic 1)

Epic 2

- Story 2

-- Task C (Epic Link automatically set to Epic 2)

With the new feature of having multiple issues in the same structure I was curious to see what will happen to the epic field if one task is copied to another epic. This is what I've got after copying Task B under Story 2 (= same level as Task C) by pressing ctrl and dragging the mouse:

Epic 1

- Story 1

-- Task A (Epic Link = Epic 1)

Epic 2

- Story 2

-- Task B (Epic Link automatically set to Epic 2)

-- Task C (Epic Link = Epic 2)

- Task B (Epic Link automatically set to Epic 2)

The original Task B disappeared from Epic 1/Story 1 and appeared on level 2 under Epic 2.

What I've expected is this:

Epic 1

- Story 1

-- Task A (Epic Link = Epic 1)

-- Task B (Epic Link = Epic 1)

Epic 2

- Story 2

-- Task B (Epic Link = Epic 1)

-- Task C (Epic Link = Epic 2)

To my opinion the synchronizer should be aware that "the original" Task B was belonging to Epic 1 and therefore should not change the epic link of the copied Task B to Epic 2.

If this won't be possible the behaviour that is happening should at least come with a warning message.

[Eugene Sokhransky]

Hello and thank you for your suggestion,

The thing is that the rule for the Agile synchronizer is defined in a certain way - basically it says that all issues under every Epic should have Epic Link for this Epic. When you copy a Task under a new Epic the only alternative solution, that would follow the rule, would be to return the Task under its original Epic. 

Copying the task under another epic creates ambiguity and there is no way to understand what the Epic link should be - the only way to tell would be to check the history and this will be creating confusion. 

In this particular example, what is the real use case for such move? 

If the task relates to two different epics, I’d split it into two different parts and put each task under its corresponding parent. This would keep things more consistent. Or is there some reason why such approach is not convenient/wouldn’t work?

Kind Regards,

Eugene Sokhransky

ALM Works

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Structure Plugin for JIRA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to structure-plugin-f...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.