AdminIgor Sereda
(CEO / Founder, ALM Works)
My feedback
151 results found
-
3 votes
Will add another function to extract a matching substring. A longer workaround is already available: please see the comment.
An error occurred while saving the comment An error occurred while saving the comment David, Mikal, thank you! That's a great idea.
I think it's currently possible, although it's not very convenient and, frankly, poorly documented. What you can do is to use the formula column and REPLACE function, using regular expressions. See https://wiki.almworks.com/display/structure/Expr+Pattern+Matching for starters.
What we failed to mention is that you can use $1, $2, etc. in the replacement string to refer to the groups in the regex – since this is all done with the Java's Matcher.replaceAll() method.
So, for example, if you have field value "Name: Value", you can extract the value with a formula
REPLACE(Field; '/Name: (.*)/'; '$1')
Note that it will only replace the matching parts, which means that if you want to _extract_ the value, you will need to match the whole string, probably using ".*" parts. If you're dealing with Description or other multi-line fields, you will need to add a flag to have "." match the end-of-line characters ("\n"). So if you have a Description that somewhere contains this name: value text, you would use
REPLACE(Description; '''/(?sm).*Name:([^\n]+).*/'; '$1')
Also, if there's no match, no replacement takes place and you get the original value of the field. To have an empty result in such cases, you will need to use IF() and MATCH() with a similar regex.
We could have a function like EXTRACT(), which would make this all much simpler. We'll add it to our plans! Also, we'll need to update the documentation with the information I wrote here.
Thanks!
Igor -
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi, we're working on a large update to the subsystem that enables formulas. This problem is also on our radar. Look out for Structure 6.0 announcements later this year!
An error occurred while saving the comment Got it, thanks, Matthias!
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Matthias,
So, if I understand you correctly, you'd like to have a kind of a "running total", going from top to bottom over the top-level issues (or maybe "sibling" issues under a common parent), accruing the total value and, when a threshold is reached, showing something like a thick red line there.
Does it sound right?
We actually had a request like that before... This is a great idea, but it will need us to implement it as a feature. Unfortunately, it can't be done with the current formulas, which are entirely bottom-up (SUM and the like) or top-down (PARENT, JOIN).
Kind regards,
Igor -
15 votes
collecting requirements (see comments)
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Tiago,
No problem - thanks for coming back to this topic. Let's keep it in mind. For now, it's possible to have this achieved through an external script, or probably through a scheduled Jira task with Script Runner. We might have additional means in the future as we introduce more automation capabilities.
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Tiago, thanks for your suggestion! It does make sense, although I'm not sure how popular such requirement would be. I'll record it as a feature.
I think the way to address this right now is through external automation: one can write a script that would call the Excel exporting address, pass the parameters and download the resulting file, then send it as an attachment. Would you have a separate host to run such script regularly?
-
4 votes
please see the comment
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Paul,
Thank you for your suggestion. Let me assure you that we're very much aware of AUI components and Atlassian Design Guidelines. However, that is what they are -- the guidelines. They provide the best practices and we're trying to follow them when appropriate.
Implementing everything exclusively with AUI components would have been wonderful, if it was possible. It would've saved us a lot of time! But the components allow only some 80% of the required behavior -- the things that Atlassian UX developers had thought of and had time to implement. Restricting ourselves by that means removing certain features or making the whole UI even more bulky.
But I appreciate your concerns. You mentioned transformation features. Is there something in there in particular that that stands out or annoys you? We can look into improving a certain part.
Thanks!
Igor -
16 votes
Collecting requirements – please see the comment.
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Jeremy, thank you for the explanation!
Please note that each link has a direction. For example, "Blocks" link type would have directions "A blocks B" and "B is blocked by A". Would it be correct to say that when you configure such an extender (that would include multiple link types), then you'd want to see all linked issues regardless of the direction?
Also, could you expand a little on what is the use case -- how do you use such structure?
Thank you!
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hi Jeremy, thanks for the suggestion --
It does make sense, but brings a couple questions. Will this extender require the user to configure a direction for each of the link type? Can you expand a bit more about the use case?
Thanks!
Igor -
1 vote
thanks! please see comments for more information
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Scott,
Sorry for delayed reply and thanks for your suggestion. We'll review our documentation where it describes working with Views.
In your particular case, you should be able to select the Basic View, then start making modifications (add/reorder/remove columns). When the view is modified, you should see the "Save As..." link if you are logged in.
Kind regards,
Igor -
3 votes
Already possible with latest Structure – see comments for details. More improvements are coming.
An error occurred while saving the comment Josh, for aggregation through the hierarchy you need to use curly brackets -- MAX{}, not MAX(). These are "aggregate functions", not the usual functions. Please see documentation here: https://wiki.almworks.com/display/structure/Aggregate+Function+Reference
Also, you'll need to turn off "Sub Over Sub-Issues", as the aggregation will be done by formula itself.
Please let me know if this helped!
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hi Josh,
Thanks for your idea! This is possible already with the Formula column in the latest versions of Structure. Add a new column, pick "Formula..." type and write the following formula:
MAX { due_date }
or
MIN { start_date }
More information is available in documentation: https://wiki.almworks.com/x/ILjrAQ
We do have other improvements planned though that would make this possible without the formula, so I'm switching this one to "Planned".
Kind regards,
Igor -
4 votes
collecting requirements, see comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Aggelos, great to hear from you!
If you're familiar with Structure's Java API, you can use the usual StructureAttributeService to retrieve formula values. See here: https://wiki.almworks.com/x/5LDrAQ
Formula column uses attribute with ID "expr". The parameters are: "formula", which is a text formula, and "variables", which is an object (map), where keys are variable names and values are attribute specs for the mapped values.
You can see how an attribute spec looks like if you use your browser tools to see the network call to /values REST resource after you have added or reconfigured a formula column.
Note that the automatic assignment of well-known names to Jira fields happens on the client, so you'll need to do that in your code if calling APIs.
Hope this helps! Please feel free to open tickets at https://support.almworks.com if you need further help.
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Matthew, thanks for the feedback! Happy to hear formulas proved useful to you. I'd vote for this request myself, as we also found that we want to see the formula value on an issue page and maybe in other add-ons.
And you're right, it's a bit tricky. According to current thought, there are several ways to implement that:
1. Have Structure provide a new custom field type, similar to Calculated Field by Script Runner. The configuration of such field would involve selecting a structure to run upon and editing the formula in the same way you do that on the Structure Board. This means one custom field only shows values from one structure.
2. Same as above, but support only "simple" attributes, which don't depend on the structure. No totals and such. Then we need to configure only the formula.
3. Have a new synchronizer, which is installed on a structure and runs periodically, writing a formula value onto a standard custom field. The benefit here is that one can use standard fields that are supported by all add-ons, but there's going to be some delay before value is written, plus using synchronizers is less efficient (they would still run and update values even if no one is looking).
Which option appeals more to you?
Additional notes:
* To make things even less easier, one issue may appear in multiple places in a structure. If the formula includes structure-driven values like totals, an issue may have different values in different places. What should we show on the issue page remains a question.
* The Java API for formulas will be eventually published. We withhold it right now because it's evolving as we're developing this feature further (yes there's going to be more power soon!)
* Option 3, the synchronizer, can be generalized to allow pushing any Structure attribute into a custom field. This could be used to, say, have sub-issues have the same value in a field as parent issue. Or write the values calculated by Structure.Gantt like start/finish dates into custom fields.
Kind regards,
Igor -
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Andrew -- thanks, noted! I'll boost the priority of the feature request to improve Undo visibility and functionality in our backlog.
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Andrew,
Thanks for sharing the feedback. I'm sorry about the stressful experience the users had.
We'll see how we can add the following improvements:
- Explicit confirmation if multiple items are removed
- Explicit confirmation (or ignoring the keyboard press) if the focus is not on the issue
- Explicit confirmation if the item being removed is not seen (scrolled out)Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hi Marit,
Thanks for your feedback. Do you know how the deletion happens? Do they hit Delete key or press "x" button?
The pop-up message is rather prominent... There's also Undo button and a way to restore the deleted rows from structure's history.
We wouldn't require confirmation every time a user wants to remove something from a structure. This is going to be annoying for most of the users. We can probably make that a personal option, although we would prefer a solution where the person is made actively aware of what he/she is doing without disruptive questions from the UI.
Please let us know if you have any insight on how the users miss the confirmation message and what is their intent if not to remove an item.
Thanks!
Kind regards,
Igor -
107 votes
at least partial solution shipped with Structure 4.2, see comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Tim,
Thanks for the information. The "Summary" column -- the main column that shows the hierarchy -- respects line breaks when showing Description in the pop-up. (But you need to turn on the option to show the description in this column.) Other columns seem to eliminate the line breaks.
We'll need to work on improvement here. I'll open a request and we'll update this record once this is done.
Thanks again for the feedback, and sorry for the current inconvenience.
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Tim,
Thanks for your comment and sorry for delayed reply. It might be the case that line breaks are removed. Are you looking at issue Description or some other field? If it's a custom field, what is its type?
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Simon,
Thanks for your perspective. The further improvement is still on the table, but we still need to work out how this could work without disrupting the user interface.
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Good news!
Structure 4.2 just shipped with the feature that shows the full content of a cell on hover. I understand that for some it may be not an ideal solution, as not all cells are shown at once, but I hope it should help a bit.
It would be great if you tried the new version and commented whether the solution is good enough or needs more work.
Feature description: https://wiki.almworks.com/x/4A9KAg
Release notes: https://wiki.almworks.com/x/5Q9KAgKind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for your comment. No update yet, but please keep your votes and comments coming -- they do help us bring more attention to this feature.
Thanks!
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hi Pat,
Thanks -- that is one of the possible features to address this problem. I've just just raised its priority in our internal JIRA, so we might get to work on it sooner.
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Matthew, thanks for the good feedback!
From your comment I read a somewhat different feature than the one discussed here. Basically, you want to take a structure with all JIRA fields, as it is shown now, but then be able to add some notes and/or color in individual cells (which of course would required them to be bigger). And that would be the basis for a presentation.
Is that correct?
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hello Cesar,
I can't give you any specifics at this time, sorry. Structure 3.0 is coming soon so please bear with us until then. Meanwhile, issue details panel is a kind of an alternative, although it would require a larger display to be super useful.
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hello May,
We're currently working on the major Structure 3.0 release. I can't say for sure if this feature makes it into this release, it's not among the primary feature list. However, we're remaking the user interface and it may be room to either fit this feature in, or at least lay grounds to add this feature soon after 3.0.
Sorry I couldn't be more specific at this time.
Kind regards,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Michael, Matt, thanks for your feedback. We're working on improving Structure plugin in this matter. Hang on!
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Matt, thanks for your comment.
I understand the problem, we'll try to work on the multiline grid cells at some point. I suggested "on-mouse-hover" solution because it is much easier to do, as the rest of the user interface may be left untouched. Of course easier does not mean better, but it usually means quicker.
A question for you: would you possible need to see multiple lines in all cells (custom fields with long texts), or do you need only to see more of the Description? (I'm thinking about the way MS Outlook shows second line with message body stretched across all other columns.)
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Shawn, thanks for your comment! At this moment, we're not yet working on this problem but we'll try to come up with a clever solution soon.
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for your comment.
I agree that showing the text only on mouse hover is not a very good solution from usability standpoint.
However, I think that if we allow the rows on the grid to have different heights - depending on how large the content is, it will kill the visibility of the hierarchical structure. This is not an issue on the Issue Navigator, but it definitely is on the structure widget. Take a look at the Printable Page - which behaves exactly like that. It is too easy to make the structure very much unreadable there, and we still haven't found a better solution.
We'll keep this in mind as we go on. Perhaps when we have a full issue preview (like GreenHopper), the severity of this issue will get a bit lower.
Thanks
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for the idea!
Would it work if the full text was shown if you move mouse pointer to hover over it? (Overlapping other issues)
I'm not sure I got the idea about the layout - is it about having two rows of cells for each issue instead of one?
Igor
-
3 votes
please see the comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Frank!
I'm sorry for the response delayed so much, the request somehow fell through the cracks.
Your request is perfectly reasonable -- however, it is doable only in certain cases, for example, when the progress is calculated based on time tracking. In that case, if an issue is mentioned twice in different parts, its weight in the final result is the same. However, if we do resolution-based (0 or 100) individual progress + all issues have the same weight, it won't be possible to eliminate double counting.
As a workaround, I can suggest using Formula column instead of Progress column. It lets you calculate progress, for example, with formula SUM { time_spent } / SUM { time_spent + remaining_estimate }. Note that SUM{} construct by default ignores the duplicates.
Additionally, starting with version 4.5, Structure has additional user interface to highlight duplicates, if that is undesired.
Hope that helps!
Igor -
9 votes
issue in backlog, update will follow when delivered
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Robin,
Thanks for your suggestion. Do I understand you correctly, that the support for n-tiered fields that you are looking for is the ability of the grouper to replicate the hierarchy of the field's cascading values and place the issues in the the corresponding hierarchical buckets?
If this is something else, could you please clarify?
Thank you!
Igor -
2 votes
Please see the comments for a workaround.
An error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for your suggestion!
In the current architecture, a grouper (which you are using to assign issues to folders) cannot remove items from a structure, it can only group. We'll review this architecture closer to Structure 5.0 and maybe make adjustments.
Currently, you can achieve the same result with Filter transformation. Open Transformations panel, and add Filter : S-JQL with the condition "not folder('No value')" and (important) make it apply at the specific level where this folder is expected. You can save this transformation and associate with the structure. See https://wiki.almworks.com/x/YLDrAQ
If you need to make this filter a part of structure, that's a bit tricky, because normally Filters are applied before Groupers. So you'll need to create a second structure, insert the first structure in it (via Insert : Structure), and then add a similar filter.
Hope this helps!
Igor -
1 vote
collecting requirements — see comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Nora,
Thanks for the feedback! So do I understand you correctly: you would like to be able to copy to clipboard some path based on the issue keys or summaries.
For example, if you have structure
* ABC-1
* * XYZ-2
* * * DEF-3then for DEF-3 you'd like to have path like "ABC-1 / XYZ-2 / DEF-3" - right? (Issue keys or summaries or both?)
Note that if you need just to send a pointer to another person, you can use "Share" button and perspectives -- see https://wiki.almworks.com/x/tbDrAQ
Kind regards,
Igor -
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment Thanks, Alain, that's a great idea! I've posted it to our JIRA.
Igor
An error occurred while saving the comment Hello Alain,
Thanks for your feedback. Please confirm if I got it correctly: you'd like the extenders (like Links extender) to be optionally limited by the JQL for the parents and JQL for the children. Right?
Kind regards,
Igor -
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Sergey, thanks for the suggestion!
-
7 votes
collecting requirements – please see comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Russell,
Thanks for your suggestion. Latest versions of Structure have integration with Portfolio, in particular, there are "Parent Link" extender and grouper that would allow you to rebuild a portfolio plan.
Could you please expand on what exactly are you looking for? We'll see if it is already shipped or if we need to add more features.
Thanks!
Igor -
3 votes
Likely planned for 3.0
An error occurred while saving the comment So, Structure 3 has the selector in the toolbar for the level of expansion. The remaining part is adding that as a setting to gadget.
An error occurred while saving the comment Hello John,
Thanks for your suggestion! Collapse/expand to a specific level is coming with 3.0 release. It also makes sense to add the initial expansion level to the gadget parameters, I'm not sure if we can fit it into 3.0, but we'll try.
As for making it a part of the view, I think it will introduce more problems than it would solve. We may consider something like "default expansion level" for a structure, but I guess that's further down the road.
Kind regards,
Igor -
4 votes
investigating – please see comment
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Pim, has this problem been resolved?
Thanks,
IgorAn error occurred while saving the comment Hi Pim,
Of course you should be able to scroll down. If you don't see a scrollbar and you're on Mac OS X, check if you can scroll with finger gestures. Also on any operating system you can use keyboard (arrows and pageup/pagedown).
If you still cannot scroll through structure, please send a screenshot to support@almworks.com and the following information: your operating system and version, you browser and version, the version of Structure in use, the version of JIRA in use.
Thanks!
Igor -
3 votes
collecting requirements – please see comments
An error occurred while saving the comment Hi Jason,
By "sync task", do you mean the Filter synchronizer? Did you try the "JQL Inserter", which is a part of the new Automation feature, available in Structure 3.0? If you haven't tried it yet, check out the "Structure 3 Quick Start Guide" here - https://wiki.almworks.com/x/HbHrAQ
Kind regards,
Igor
Thanks for the kind words :) Yes, please do post ideas!
Igor