How to Use Project-Specific Fields, Such As Release, in Embedded Filters

Cool. I hope this works for you.

The funny thing is, we were trying to use TAGs to get around the problem of not being able to use Release.  But now we don't need it with this method. Thanks.

The keyword scope searches fieldname:value, so you should be able to find any value that can be found in item field (so, sadly, no tags). 

This is very helpful information.  I am a bit disappointed it took me so long to find this.  I truly hope that the future index will allow for simplified filters that include Release, TAGs, etc. for both "All Project" filters in both the main filter and the embedded filter using just the field names.  Without this simplification, its difficult to use advanced queries x-project, up/down stream, etc.

But thanks for this information.

Is there a documented list of "keyword" field specifies that can be used in addition to "release:<release>"?

Hi Ian, By the way, though nested searching thru multi-levels may not be supported by the current version of Jama, do be aware that at least you can report and analyze multiple-level downstream relationships by using the Coverage Explorer and also (2-6) upstream relationships by custom Velocity reports. This may serve as stop-gap work-arounds. I do understand your pain though. Good luck. swoo 

Dutch, you can speak with your account manager and ask them about the roadmap. That will clarify what the priorities are and strategies going forward, and from there you can point  how that's impacting your users (ergo, impacting our bottom line as well). 

I'm curious, though, what your workflow is that you need to have up and downstream relationships embedded in a filter. As you all have probably figured out, there is a little bit of play with the embedded filter condition # of Upstream Relationships or # of Downstream Relationships. So if I wanted to identify Features that have downstream Requirements, but only Requirements with relationships, I could...
 

But I understand this does not cover many use cases.

That's very disappointing, Kristina. Writing a filter/query that involves the up- and down-stream relationships should be a fundamental capability in Jama. I'm in the same predicament as Ian; NOT having this nesting ability is costing us time/$ and credibility with the cross-functional teams trying to adopt Jama in their workflows. Do we really need to go through the process of posting this capability as an idea and wait to see what happens in the community?

Hi Ian, I agree that nesting filters would be really really cool, but no, we don't have that ability. The embedded filter ability is very limited. And honestly, I'm not sure when we plan on making changes to how the filters operate.

Your observation is correct that no nesting of search is possible. What I do sometimes is to find some results. Tag them. And search started with these tagged results. Very ugly and tedious.

Hi Kristina,

I've got a (tangentially) related question about embedded filters. It seems that the list of available 'conditions' in an embedded filter doesn't contain all the options that are available in the 'top level' filter conditions pick-list. The ones that I was expecting to see (but didn't) are "Has downstream items" and "Has upstream items." Is what I'm seeing correct behaviour for this feature?

Also, it appears that embedded filters allow only one level of "nesting" - that is, I don't seem to have the option to embed a filter inside an embedded filter. Again, is this correct behaviour?

(I'd REALLY like to have the options that I've mentioned here!)

Cheers,
Ian

P.S. What I REALLY REALLY want to be able to do is to create and save a "top level" filter then embed that inside a new filter. AND I'd expect to then be able embed THAT filter inside another filter and so on. This is certainly something that I'm used to being able to do in Cradle - creating these "nested queries" seems like it should be straightforward capability in Jama. Am I missing something?