Mark requirement as "Obsolete" not possible

Thursday, March 9, 2017 12:07:28 PM


I am trying to figure out how to make it visible in SpiraTeam that a requirement was needed/valid for a given release, let's say release 1, but is dropped/no longer valid for release 2. I believe the only way to do this is to mark the requirement as obsolete while keeping it pointed to release 1.

When I try to mark a requirement from completed to obsolete, the system will not save my changes and instead set the status back to developed. This is the case where there are tasks for the requirement, even though these tasks have the status completed. Only when I completely remove the tasks, it is allowed to change the status for the requirement to obsolete.

Am I missing something here or is this a bug?

I would like to be able to set a requirement to obsolete for next releases, but not lose the information about tasks associated. And apart from that, it could mean a lot of work if you have to remove tasks every time.

Are there plans to create a different status for requirements that were valid before, but not in new releases? Something like "removed in release..."?



3 Replies
Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:50:37 PM
re: ykingma on Thursday, March 9, 2017 12:07:28 PM

Hi Yvette

I think the issue may be that the Tasks are keeping it active. That shouldn't happen for the Obsolete status, only for the earlier statuses (i.e. when all tasks are completed, it goes to Developed). Can you please log a help desk ticket so that one of our QA team can investigate further.



Tuesday, March 14, 2017 1:51:26 PM
re: ykingma on Thursday, March 9, 2017 12:07:28 PM

We are also planning on adding an Obsolete Release field, so you can specify which release it was 'removed' in.

Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:35:17 PM
re: inflectra.jimx on Tuesday, March 14, 2017

Thank you, I've created a ticket for the help desk as you suggested.

Good to know that the Obsolete Release field is already planned for.



  • Started: Thursday, March 9, 2017 12:07:28 PM
  • Last Reply: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:35:17 PM
  • Replies: 3
  • Views: 1064