Using %{nnnnn.i} Doesn't work

Issue #96 resolved
Ziv Rechnitser created an issue

I used the %{nnnnn.i} to copy base level field from Cascading Select fields to other field at post-function. Now this mechanism stop working. Jira version - 6.3.5a.

Comments (17)

  1. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    Hi Ziv,

    I have tried to reproduce your problem without success, i.e., for me it is working correctly

    In the following screenshots I show you the configuration I have used: conf-1.png

    Once configured, post-function looks like this: conf-2.png

    Field %{10901} is a Cascading Select field called City in Country.

    As you can see, there is a remarkable difference with your screenshot: once post-function is configured, in my example it is shown: %{City in Country.0}, while in yours the ending 0 character is missing. I can't imagine why this is happening in your case.

    Is it possible to have a screen share through Skype right now? I would like to see your configuration in live.

    My Skype user is fidel100r.

  2. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    Some questions:

    • Did that same configuration (same cascading field and post-function) work with previous version of the plugin, and stopped working after upgrade to 2.1.24?
    • Which version of the plugin did you have installed before version 2.1.24?
    • Can you try with another cascading select field? There could be something in that particular field (Component and Sub Component) that has something to do with the problem.
    • How is it failing? Does it return an empty string?
  3. Ziv Rechnitser reporter
    1. It's hard for me to say in what version it stopped to work.
    2. Probably 2.1.23
    3. I tried it with some other cascading select fields and it didn't work too.
    4. Yes,empty string.
  4. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    Have you tried to read level 1 of cascading select field "Component and Sub Component"? Did it work?

    Can you please try post-function "Copy cascading select to custom field" and let me know whether it's reads base level of cascading select field "Component and Sub Component"?

    Sincerely, I'm quite lost about your problem, since I'm not able to reproduce it. Is it possible to have a Skype screen share?

  5. Ziv Rechnitser reporter
    1. I tried read level 1, it's do the same.
    2. I will try it later.

    I can't do Skype screen share today, tomorrow?

  6. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    I will be available for a screen share tomorrow morning. Please, let me know the result of the alternative post-function for reading cascading select fields.

    Another question: is field "Component and Sub Component" a Cascading Select or a Multi-Level Cascading Select field?

  7. Ziv Rechnitser reporter

    We are taking about Cascading Select. I tried the "Copy cascading select to custom field" and it's working.

  8. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    Hi Ziv,

    While I haven't been able to reproduce your problem, I have found a slight difference in the way both post-functions read the value of a cascading select field. I have made modifications to unify the code.

    Please, try the following beta version (2.1.25_beta_2), and please tell me if it solves your problem.

    This version is almost identical to stable version 2.1.24, so I consider that you can use it in production environment without concerns.

  9. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    I think I have reproduced the problem, and version 2.1.25_beta_2 fixes effectively it.

    The problem I have found is that when a cascading select takes value in a transition screen, this new value is not available for post-functions in the transition.

    Can you, please, confirm that you are setting cascading select field in a transition screen?

    Please, confirm that version 2.1.25_beta_2 solves your problem?

  10. Ziv Rechnitser reporter

    It's working!!! Thanks, should I need to use the beta or you will implement this fix in upcoming release?

  11. Fidel Castro Armario repo owner

    I recommend you to use the beta, since it only differs from version 2.1.24 in 2 bug fixes: Issue #95 and Issue #96.

    New stable version will be released in 2 weeks approximately.

  12. Log in to comment