Currently, if you are trying to convert from a defect to a story or vice versa and the target asset has a required field that does not exist on the source asset, the system gives an error saying that a required field's value is missing. This effectively does not allow users to convert between stories and defects if there are required fields present.

The application should be modified so that if you are converting to an asset with a required field, the system gives you a screen where you can provide values for the missing required field(s).


  • This is a constant source of annoyance for our team. I agree with the solution Andrew C. has proposed. Just prompt me to provide the required fields with a red asterisk or something.

  • I've added an equivalent issue under "If a field is set to required for a Defect work item". A workaround is provided there, but a solution as stated here is preferred.

  • We encountered this same problem, which we consider to be a bug. This solution would definitely be preferred to a workaround.

  • Just discovered this issue as well. I like the proposed solution.

  • Another approach would be simply to suspend enforcement of required fields during the conversion process. This should be an easy fix either way.

  • I like this solution. Being provided an interface to enter or modify a required field would be extremely helpful.

  • Getting stale, any plans to address this V1?

  • Does any of these get fixed one day? I have written on other comments and nothing ever gets fixed. Please update us on when this can addressed.

  • would be a beneficial update

  • Agreed - this is an annoying and time consuming defect to deal with, esp if trying to convert the item during a scrum call when speed and smoothness count.

  • I really wish VersionOne would just remove Required fields because honestly they only cause more issues to be worked around.

    In this scenario, why don't you pop up a version of the Defect form so that a user can simply enter a value in the new required field?

    I just don't get it.

  • Agree with Andrew C.

    Please fix, it is a regular annoyance.

  • The ability to conveniently convert stories to defect and vice versa was such a plus till we hit this issue. We do need one or two fields to be required and the fact that we can't convert due to this is very very annoying. Surprised this feature request (more like a bug in my opinion) is still pending!

  • We lose precious time, because of this.
    The workaround posted on documentation page is simply not applicable.
    We have more than 50 products in V1 and we certainly don't want to have 50 project workspaces, because system administration will become nightmare.
    Do you really think that someone will want to modify the project workspaces two times just to convert a story to defect or vice versa.
    Not to mention that if we are to apply this workaround we must give System Admin rights to everyone.

    When conversion is not possible (due to required fields) simply insert an itermediate screen where people can specify the mandatory fields.
    Intermediate screen is anyway required for this idea, so you'll shoot two rabits with one shot.

  • This is a big issue for us too. When can we expect this to be resolved?

  • Please consider doing this. We run into this problem because the system Product Owner(Customer) field does not exist on defects (which is a whole other problem) and we make this field required on backlog items.

  • We have the same issue and need this fixed!

  • Our teams have run into this issue many times and would love to utilize the out-of-box dropdown selection to convert the story to a defect, rather than deleting the story and creating a new defect. We often have conversations on the story itself before determining it was indeed a missed requirement and not an enhancement (therefore should be converted to a defect), and we do not want to lose the history and conversations.

    Please consider prioritizing this fix; it seems that many other customers have experienced this for over a year so I think it could benefit us all. Thank you!