Upcoming - Rename ‘epics’ in your company-managed projects

[Deleted user]

Hi Rohan,

We have enrolled for renamed the Epic issue type to Feature and 

we have already renamed Epic issue type to Features now i can see Epic is displaying as Feature

but there are few custom fields still showing as old name like

Epic Color

Epic Link

Epic Name

Epic Status

now the Epic status is also not working properly

and how to add a new Hierarchy on top of Feature ?

can you pls give me some assistance

Regards,

Venkatesh. R  

[Deleted user]

Hi Rohan,

We have enrolled for renamed the Epic issue type to Feature and 

on our test instance already renamed Epic issue type to Features now we can see Epic is displaying as Feature

but there are few custom fields still showing as old name like

Epic Color

Epic Link

Epic Name

Epic Status

now the Epic status workflow is also not working properly

and how to add a new Hierarchy on top of Feature?

 can you pls give me some assistance Please

Regards

Venkatesh. R

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @[deleted] 

These features haven't yet been rolled out to general access, so for most users they're not yet available. Have you enrolled in the Epic Renaming Beta?

If not, it's expected that all of these fields still exist as they did previously. If you are enrolled though, could you please give us a bit more detail about where you're seeing these fields still?

I'll also note that users enrolled in the Epic Renaming Beta are not currently able to add new hierarchy levels. We're also using Issue Status instead of Epic Status in the beta, so that may also be the issue you're running into there. 

[Deleted user]

Hi Daniel,

We have already enrolled in the Epic Renaming Beta and it has been rolled out for our test instance

after renaming Epic to feature now we can see the feature backlog.

but there are few custom fields still showing as old name like we use if for Epic same to be renamed either as Feature or Parent 

Epic Color

Epic Link

Epic Name

Epic Status

Regards

Venkatesh. R

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @[deleted]

Thanks for clarifying that you're enrolled in the Beta.

The fields you've mentioned should still exist, and we're not expecting to rename them. However, we're no longer using the contents of these fields to populate information relating to Epics. Instead this will be done with more general fields:
- Epic Color -> Issue Color
- Epic Link -> Breadcrumb parent switcher
- Epic Name -> Issue Summary
- Epic Status -> Issue Status

The beta also does not support using the renamed Epic issue type in workflows and automations.

You can read a bit more about this in Epic Renaming Beta group, where you can also get in touch with us with specific questions relating to the beta. https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Epic-Renaming-Beta-Articles/Intro-to-Epic-Renaming/ba-p/2079709

Cheers,

Daniel

[Yatish Madhav]

Hi

Just wondering when will this be rolled out to our instance. I have some Jira Cloud API scripts where we get the Epic Link of an issue OR get issues with JQL using Epic Link.

I would like to know how best to prepare and change the script and when exactly it will affect us. 

Thank you

Yatish

[Cole Perrault]

Has this been released yet, we are trying to add a taxonomy of Epics, Features, Stories, and Tasks but are unable to at this time. We are on the advance version of JIRA Roadmapping

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @Yatish Madhav & @Cole Perrault

These changes aren't yet available, and while we don't have a concrete date, we're currently expecting them to be rolled in Q4 2023. More updates will be provided here on the Atlassian Community as we get closer to our release date, and you can also keep an eye on the public roadmap here for up to date shipping information: https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-articles/Upcoming-Rename-epics-in-your-company-managed-projects/ba-p/1874726

@Yatish Madhav - Regarding your JQL queries: you can continue to use the Epic Link clause, we won't be breaking the way these clauses work in existing JQL queries. Once these changes roll out though, you can use the parent clause in future queries for the same functionality.

[Yatish Madhav]

Thanks @Daniel Capizzi  / @Rohan Swami  - I am watching this article and have liked the original post so that I can be notified and kept on top of this. We are relying quite heavily on this change and want to prep early as we are rolling some new processes internally that makes use of the API to Epics and issue's Epics.

I was under the impression this change was pushed to later 2022 still as it states "Our updates are scheduled to begin rolling out from mid-2022" and this post https://community.developer.atlassian.com/t/deprecation-of-the-epic-link-parent-link-and-other-related-fields-in-rest-apis-and-webhooks/54048 OR https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-articles/REST-APIs-and-webhooks-deprecation-of-the-Epic-Link-Parent-Link/ba-p/1873986 

Thank you

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @Yatish Madhav

The links you've provided here are regarding the deprecation of the epic and parent link fields in our APIs which is separate to the Epic Renaming features described in this post.

The Epic Renaming features described in this post won't introduce any breaking changes to the way that you interact with your Jira site.

The pages you've linked however will introduce breaking changes to the way you interact with the API. If you're just using the API to make JQL queries which include the "epic link" clause this will continue to work, but any API calls where you're consuming the epic link field directly will break. These changes haven't been rolled out yet, but will soon so I would recommend working through the recommendations on those posts and ensuring your API calls are in order! If you have any specific questions regarding those please feel free to comment on those posts and our engineers can help you out.

Cheers,

Daniel

[Yatish Madhav]

OK Thanks @Daniel Capizzi - I guess the 2 changes still confuse me as they both to do with Epics and seems like both changes will affect us.

Please advise what you mean by "consuming the epic link field"?

Currently we get Epic Link field key by the field name from all fields in the instance and then get an issue via the api and then extract the issue.fields.EpicLinkFieldKey value from it.

The other thing like I mentioned is we pull issues using the getIssues endpoint and use the "Epic Link" = ID - You said "Once these changes roll out though, you can use the parent clause..." Am I correct in saying that we cannot use parent in place of Epic Link right now in the JQL?

Thank you
Yatish

[Daniel Capizzi]

@Yatish Madhav

Regarding your JQL: that's correct, you can't yet use the parent clause in place of Epic Link, but we're working on rolling this out as soon as possible. However I'll highlight that your Epic Link clauses will continue to work as they did before.

"Consuming the epic link field" just refers to any of the changes described in this blog post: https://community.developer.atlassian.com/t/deprecation-of-the-epic-link-parent-link-and-other-related-fields-in-rest-apis-and-webhooks/54048

For any more specific questions regarding this, I'd recommend you reach out to our engineers over at the developer community. The above page has been closed, but you can still post comments and questions here: https://community.developer.atlassian.com/t/update-deprecation-of-epic-link-parent-link-and-other-related-fields-in-webhooks/62893

Cheers,

Daniel

[Ricardo_Gomes]

Hi @Rohan Swami ,

I find these changes a bit confusing as I don't intend to rename the Epic issue type, but instead I'd like to add a new level above Epic called "Initiative".

In my current setup in Jira Premium, I have created a new issue type for Initiative and used Advanced Roadmaps to place it above Epic (see screenshot below). However, it seems that Initiative is not really natively considered the parent to be parent of Epics (see in the image below where there's a number "2" next to Initiative and a "1" next to Epic. Does that mean Epic is still considered the highest level in my hierarchy?

I am using the "Parent Link" field on the Epic level to link to the respective Initiative but I am not sure that's the correct way to do it? 

Or will this feature not allow me to accomplish the desired goal here whatsoever no matter what I do?

It is a very common requirement in SAFE to place other levels above Epics. The part I am not understanding is how this featured announced by Atlassian will help this use case...

Kindly advise.

Thanks!

[Curt Holley]

@Ricardo_Gomes 
Using the "Parent Link" field is the right way to link to issue types above Epic. The 2 you refer to represents the level above standard issue types (Stories, tasks etc.), as in: 2 levels above standard.
Epic is always in the 1 level above standard and that can't be changed (though adding other issue types to that level is now available).

So from what you have said, you have already achieved your goal of having the Initiative issue type above Epic and you are successfully hierarchically linking from Epics to Initiatives via the Parent link field. If you wanted to create another level above Initiative, it would be level 3 and would also use the parent link field from Initiatives up to whatever issue type you choose to add to level 3.

Hopefully this helps?

[Haddon Fisher]

Hey @Rohan Swami - is it going to be possible to retain the ability to link issues to parents via a field either in the central block or in the right-rail? The 'new breadcrumb experience' is not what we want.

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @Haddon Fisher - thanks for getting in touch. It will still be possible to link issues to parents via the sidebar of the issue view - the epic link and parent link fields will be replaced by a single parent field that can be used instead of the breadcrumbs

[Archana Keswani]

 My organization has Standard version of JIRA.  I am looking for creating Epic->Feature->User story->Task.  we wanted to connect the User stories through Feature and not directly to Epic.   same way we need to create the task under User Stories.  what I understand now is we need to buy premium version to achieve this.  Should I go for premium version at this point of time ?

[Daniel Capizzi]

Hi @Archana Keswani

Welcome to the Atlassian Community!

On the standard version of Jira it will be possible to rename your epic level, but to create the extra hierarchy levels as you've described in your comment you'll need to be on a premium version of Jira.

I will point out though that the features described in this blog post aren't yet available. While it's already possible to create extra hierarchy levels on premium, we're still working on the ability to rename the epic level, so the hierarchy configuration you've described is not yet possible unfortunately.

Currently we're expecting to roll these changes out in Q4, and you can keep an eye on these blog posts and our public roadmap for updates!

https://www.atlassian.com/roadmap/cloud??&search=epic&p=c0c344ce-98

Cheers,

Daniel

[Darwin]

Hi there,

I am trying to add a hierarchy level for 

1. Epics
2. Story
3. Task types
4. Task types

How can i do this in advance roadmaps? 

[Tanya Fraser]

Is the ability to have multiple Epic-level issue types (ie Feature and an Epic) included in the March release, or is that a future state?

[Rasmus Hovendal]

Safe Agile Framework?? 🙈😂 

Usually SAFe is referring to SCALED Agile Framework (hence the need to reflect different levels of business requirements - from strategic to tactical). But I guess you are aware..... 🤞💪

[Dave Mathijs]

Same question as tanya (and maybe others have asked before): Will it be possible to create multiple Epic-level issue types with the same functionality?

[Sean Hogg]

What is the target for this. Article says Mid 2022. Is this planned for 2023, when?

[Kate West-Walker]

Hey @Tanya Frasernative support for multiple epic level issue types is unfortunately not included in this release. 

[Kate West-Walker]

Hey @Sean Hogg, thanks for the heads up. We'll get the article updated, but you can also follow our timeline for releasing this over at our cloud public roadmap: https://www.atlassian.com/wac/roadmap/cloud/flexible-naming-of-epics?p=c0c344ce-98