Possible to add new fields in summary tables (including custom)

[deanord]

Enhancement request.

First of all, this plug-in is magic and I'm grateful for its existence! This single feature is responsible for me moving over to Joplin.

Is there a way to add other fields in the inline search template other than the following?

'k': $.key | 'u': $.fields.summary | 't': $.fields.issuetype | '<': $.fields.created | '>': $.fields.updated | 'd': $.fields.duedate | 'c': $.fields.creator | 'r': $.fields.reporter | 'a': $.fields.assignee | 'p': $.fields.priority | 's': $.fields.status | 'e': $.fields.resolution |

[marc0l92]

Hello, If you are using Joplin mainly for this plugin, I suggest you to migrate to Obsidian.

I moved my notes to Obsidian and I created a similar plugin there as well: https://github.com/marc0l92/obsidian-jira-issue

I moved to obsidian because the plugin system of Joplin was really limited and I wanted to have a note taking application that don't require to work in 2 columns mode.

In obsidian you can add all the columns you want, I implemented a way to suggest you the columns name, you can reference the issues directly in the text without creating a dedicated code block.

I suggest you to take a look at the readme of the plugin.

But if you want to stay in Joplin also for other reasons I can add the support of more columns. Which column are you interested in?

[deanord]

Hi Marco, Thank you for the quick reply. I'll take a look at Obsidian, particularly since your Jira plug-in there seems to be more robust as you stated. Dave

[deanord]

Marco, Thanks again for your work here. I did as you suggested and switched to Obsidian. You're right--the plug-in ecosystem is considerably more robust. Dave