Merging tickets doesn't trigger notification for target ticket


  • Used Zammad version: 3.3 & 3.4
  • Used Zammad installation source: package
  • Operating system: CentOS 7
  • Browser + version: any

Expected behavior:

  • When ticket B is merged into ticket A the owner of ticket A must be notified of an update to his ticket

Actual behavior:

  • When ticket B is merged into ticket A only the owner of ticket B is notified of the change to status “merged”, the owner of ticket A doesn’t receive a notification for the update of his ticket, neither per mail nor per Zammad notification. The icon of the ticket doesn’t flash either.

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  • Merge two tickets

There are several issus with ticket merging:

  • There should be a visual cue in the target ticket that another ticket was merged into it. Right now it’s almost impossible to see that, apart from the history. There should be a line similar to the line that gets added when a mail notification is sent out stating that the content below comes from a merged ticket with a link to it (like in the history).
  • Also if the target ticket is closed it has to be reopened, as it already happens with other normal updates.
  • The icon of the ticket should flash like with other ticket updates.
  • And we need a trigger condition for “merged into” like described here

Please let me know if this qualifies for a Github issue

I do agree on the first part, however, wouldn’t be a fan of combining 4 issues into one issue.
That breaks overviews and logically is not correct, because you also imply enhancements.

I do agree that a ticket merge on the target ticket should qualitfy to agent notifications like any other ticket because it gets updated.

The merge information is already present at tickets:

I personally don’t think that this should always be correct. I sometimes might want to merge e.g. two closed tickets together. If I merge content into a closed ticket, I do see it’s closed and could adjust this.

This is usually something I’d have to do anyway, because I might have to provide more information to the owner as example. That’s a workflow thing.

I do agree that this should happen, the pulsing of the taskbar tab could be included into that issue you may create.

That’s an enhancement issue and is already known. No need to mention it on the issue. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Thanks for the detailed answer Marcel :slightly_smiling_face:

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 120 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.