Feature #1624

Issue merging

Added by Nikolai Bochev over 9 years ago. Updated 9 months ago.

Status:NewStart date:2008-07-11
Priority:NormalDue date:
Assignee:-% Done:

0%

Category:Issues
Target version:-
Resolution:

Description

I know i could add links to related issues, but what i'd really like to see is the possibility to merge 2 or more tickets into one.


Related issues

Related to Redmine - Feature #7997: Merge Issues New 2011-03-25
Related to Redmine - Feature #3708: Merge duplicated issues New 2009-08-03
Duplicated by Redmine - Feature #6900: merge of two or more ticket Closed 2010-11-15

History

#1 Updated by Paul Rivier over 9 years ago

That makes sens.
Let's say B gets merged into A. Accessing to B sould :
  • lead to a 404 ?
  • redirect transparently to A
  • redirect verbosely to A

Issue discussions can be merged automatically on a timestamp basis, but what about description ? I think merging operation should prompt for the new description, including both parent descriptions surrounded by tags like conflict tags with subversion. The person doing the merge should do something about that before validating the merge operation.

WDYT ?

#2 Updated by Nikolai Bochev over 9 years ago

I think trying to access the merged ticket should redirect with a notice.
As far as the description goes - i am using OTRS at work, and it merges tickets keeping the original description of the host ticket, and adds the guest ticket's description down along the topic one a timestamp basis. What you describe should work also ( manually merging both descriptions ). The whole point for me on merging is to be able to merge duplicate tickets, but when somehow the duplicate adds something new to the related issue. So having the guest ticket's description down below in the notes will work also, as if you follow the "conversation" it will be just like someone updated the original ticket with new info.

#3 Updated by Fredrik Liljegren about 8 years ago

I guess you could be given the choice of automatic merging of #X into #Y, or manual merging. With automatic merging, something like what's stated above would work: Title and decription of the issue merged into (#Y) is kept, while the title and description of #X is added as a comment as "Merged with issue #X: Title...".

Merging is always preferrable to deleting double issues; if nothing else, you get a new watcher (the author of issue #X) and everyone can see more people wants the same thing.

#4 Updated by Fredrik Liljegren about 8 years ago

Oh, I forgot to add: I also vote for a redirection woth a notice.

#5 Updated by anthony george almost 8 years ago

Kind of reviving a semi old issue here, but I don't see any newer comments/issue pertaining to issue merging. I really wish I knew more ruby, but my background lies with perl.
I use request tracker(RT) from bestpractical.com(http://bestpractical.com/rt) on a daily basis for work, but chose redmine for personal and all code management because of its integration with subversion.
So.. I thought a little insight into how another system does this may be helpful.
Anyhoo, RT accomplishes issue merging by using a database column EffectiveID, that, under normal circumstances, would be equal to the issue ID, but when merged, the EffectiveID is equal to the issue it was merged into. The routine(s) that load issues for view, etc load up issues by id, but "overlay" it with the effectiveID, thereby giving the look that it is a single issue..

Again, if I knew ruby(at all) I'd be happy to dive in and at least hack something up, but I'm at a loss.
Hopefully this is helpful

#6 Updated by Igor Kalashnikov over 7 years ago

One more vote for manual merging :)

#7 Updated by Per Oja over 7 years ago

Another vote!

#8 Updated by Sönke Noack over 7 years ago

Oh, dear. I thought merging tickets is already possible in Redmine, but only began searching for such a feature as I couldn't figure out how to do this.

I'm also fond of the idea that it's done like in OTRS, which I had let being installed at work for handling customer issues.
However, Redmine seemed much better suited for the task of bug/feature/issue resolving and thus will hopefully supercede our homegrown bug tracking system, chiefly because of its procedure management, overview & reporting facilities.

If merging tickets really still isn't possible right now, is there any suggested workaround I can follow?

TIA and regards, Sonny

#9 Updated by Walter Heck about 7 years ago

I could also really use this. We have all emails coming from auto-creating issues in a redmine project called "unassigned". From there we move the issues into their specific projects. When we receive multiple emails in a discussion for instance, that creates a whole bunch of new issues, which is pretty annoying to handle :)

#10 Updated by Félix Delval about 7 years ago

+1 for that feature.

#11 Updated by Roland Discein over 6 years ago

+1

#12 Updated by Jason Butz over 6 years ago

+1 for this feature

#13 Updated by Mats Andreassen about 6 years ago

I was surprised to find out this was impossible in current. Consider this a +1.

#14 Updated by Brian Jacobi about 6 years ago

+1 I'm surprised this still isn't implemented. Concept of locking or merging please :)

#15 Updated by Terence Mill about 6 years ago

The you suing the email import the wrng way.
If an issue is created is gets an id which will be refernced in "topic" filed for all mail notification are created for this mail. If any new mail includes the (not 100% sure) "[#issuenumber" string the mail will be added to existing issue as comment.

Walter Heck wrote:

I could also really use this. We have all emails coming from auto-creating issues in a redmine project called "unassigned". From there we move the issues into their specific projects. When we receive multiple emails in a discussion for instance, that creates a whole bunch of new issues, which is pretty annoying to handle :)

#16 Updated by Jason Butz almost 6 years ago

I'd like at add a +1 for this feature as well.

#17 Updated by Paolo Sechi over 5 years ago

absolute a must. so +1

#18 Updated by Vlad Tyschuk over 5 years ago

Also, +1 from me for this feature.

#19 Updated by Jarek Potiuk over 5 years ago

And +1 from me.

#20 Updated by Brian Lacy about 5 years ago

+100 ;)
An extremely useful feature. Surprised there hasn't been more discussion on this..

#21 Updated by koen maes almost 5 years ago

it is not going to happen - 4 yo by now

#22 Updated by Dani Leni almost 5 years ago

+1
I still want to see this.
Now we have to move all files and transfter time spend, but we can not transfer comments right?
So we have to delete old issue...

Merge is needed. Its needed when workflow is changed.

Related is not the same.

#23 Updated by Saager Mhatre over 4 years ago

+1

#24 Updated by Jamie Carl over 4 years ago

+10

Just hit a case where I really need this! I went to merge two issues and was surprised that it wasn't there. This is essential!

#25 Updated by Jean-Philippe Lang over 4 years ago

#26 Updated by Deoren Moor over 4 years ago

+1; this would be very useful for our group.

An example case:

Someone sends in an email to a support address and CC their colleagues. Their colleagues all join in the "conversation" and continually Reply-All with the support address as a "participant". Redmine scrapes the emails and creates lots of duplicates.

For now we've been using the most recent email as the original and marking the others as duplicates of it, but having a merge option would be very useful.

#27 Updated by Etienne Massip over 4 years ago

#28 Updated by Jonathan Schneider over 4 years ago

+1

A feature I really miss from Request Tracker.

#29 Updated by Tarun Kakkar over 4 years ago

Hi team need your support to merge two tickets in Redmine .Is this available as a feature ?

Prompt response on this matter will be highly appreciable

Nikolai Bochev wrote:

I know i could add links to related issues, but what i'd really like to see is the possibility to merge 2 or more tickets into one.

#30 Updated by Chris Fields over 4 years ago

+1. I was very surprised this isn't already a feature. At the moment we are making them subtasks or 'Duplicated as' relations, but that's not really optimal.

#31 Updated by Leonid Titov about 4 years ago

Definitely necessary feature. +1 vote for it.

#32 Updated by Joerg Boeselt over 2 years ago

+1 !

#33 Updated by Leo Gaggl over 2 years ago

Any ideas if this will make it onto the roadmap at some stage ? This seems such a long-standing and obvious problem covered by most other comparable systems. It would be good to have some indications if this will be looked at.

#34 Updated by Christian Zagrodnick over 2 years ago

A related question is: Could this be sponsored? And if, how much money do we need.

#35 Updated by Leo Gaggl over 2 years ago

Christian Zagrodnick wrote:

A related question is: Could this be sponsored? And if, how much money do we need.

I concur. I am sure there would be plenty organisations that would need this. Has some kind of 'crowd-funding' been considered in the past ?

#36 Updated by Go MAEDA over 2 years ago

Christian Zagrodnick wrote:

A related question is: Could this be sponsored? And if, how much money do we need.

I think the most needed thing to implement the feature is a patch rather than money.

#37 Updated by Go MAEDA over 2 years ago

#38 Updated by Jamie Carl over 2 years ago

+1 Will we ever get this feature?

I'm getting users who report issues via email constantly creating duplicate issues by fwd'ing the email again with amendments, instead of replying to the (New) email they receive. Currently I am manually cutting and pasting the new email into the existing one then closing the new issue as a duplicate. It would be way better to actually merge this stuff.

#39 Updated by nano devel over 2 years ago

+1 for this feature! Any comment from the developer?

#40 Updated by Michael Krupp over 1 year ago

I am willing to implement this feature as a plugin, but I have a few questions first:

  • Original issue time log etries
    • leave them as-is?
    • move the entries to the target issue?
  • Original issue
    • leave it as-is?
    • delete it?
    • link it to the target issue?
    • close it?
  • Original issue relations
    • leave them as-is?
    • copy them to the target issue?
    • move them to the target issue?
  • Original issue description
    • copy it as new journal entry?
    • ignore it when merging?
  • Original issue journal entries
    • leave them as-is?
    • copy them to the target issue?
    • move them to the target issue?
  • Original issue commit references
    • leave them as-is?
    • copy them to the target issue?
    • move them to the target issue?
      (note: commit messages cannot be updated)

#41 Updated by John Cary over 1 year ago

This is what we would like to see:

Original issue time log entries
move the entries to the target issue
Original issue
link it to the target issue
close it
Original issue relations
copy them to the target issue
Original issue description
copy it as new journal entry
Original issue journal entries
copy them to the target issue
Original issue commit references
copy them to the target issue

We will be putting something at https://freedomsponsors.org/

#42 Updated by John Cary over 1 year ago

Curious as to whether there are any more comments on this?

Is there a way to contact someone at this site privately?

#43 Updated by Sönke Noack over 1 year ago

I'd agree with everything in #1624#note-41.

Concerning "Original issue", in addition to "link it to the target issue" and "close it", I would also suggest to set a status "merged" (which is of "closed" type, like "closed" and "closed unresolved").

#44 Updated by Michael Krupp over 1 year ago

Sorry for the late response, but I got carried away with other work. One of my co-workers is working on this right now, and we should have a 0.1-release ready soon.

#45 Updated by Franco Nogarin 9 months ago

Hi. 8 years later and we still cant merge issues. Sadness. @micheal has your team completed work on the hopeful plugin?

Also available in: Atom PDF