Bug handling with Cycle

PreviousFast-track your onboarding NextAPI

Last updated 8 months ago

Was this helpful?

Bug handling with Cycle

First of all, you can setup an automation so that each time you create a bug in Cycle, it will create a Linear issue mapped to it. Here is a video on how to do so.

Once it’s enabled you’ll need to create the insights & map it to the bug (or create one on the spot):

Create the piece of feedback, highlight the bit of text specific to the bug (perhaps the whole text) and link to the existing bug/create a new bug at that time
From Slack you can save time by doing the following: You can directly map a Slack message content to a Cycle bug (it will create an insight linked to that bug) by using from Slack the “…” > “Add to Cycle” > “Feature, Problem, Bug” and map it to the right doc. By doing so you’ll save the feedback processing step. You can either map it to an existing bug or create a new one from there.

Then regarding the content sent to Linear, we don’t sent the insights linked to bugs/features. What you can do is to “copy all quotes” from the bug into the bug description, then push this to Linear. The content will be displayed as a linked doc for Linear Projects & as a comment for Linear Issues.

Last but not least, let's point out that 50% of our customers prefer to have a different flow for bugs - and don’t use Cycle for that. It’s also an option.

When a bug originating from Cycle makes its way to Linear, are updates on the Linear side then communicated back into Cycle?

We don't sync updates in the content from Linear to Cycle.

What are your recommendations for Cycle status to work well with Linear?

Linear/Cycle integration will just update Cycle status to the first status in the next status category — you cannot map more precisely 1 specific status within a category so they'll mirror the ones in Linear.

So it's usually valuable to create granular statuses for PM tasks (in the Not Started category) as those are updated manually. When statuses are updated with the Linear integration (Started category), it's usually less worth to create granular statuses.

Here are the statuses we recommend for a simple, clean Cycle - Linear process.

PreviousFast-track your onboarding NextAPI

Last updated 8 months ago

Was this helpful?

First of all, you can setup an automation so that each time you create a bug in Cycle, it will create a Linear issue mapped to it. Here is a video on how to do so.

Once it’s enabled you’ll need to create the insights & map it to the bug (or create one on the spot):

Create the piece of feedback, highlight the bit of text specific to the bug (perhaps the whole text) and link to the existing bug/create a new bug at that time
From Slack you can save time by doing the following: You can directly map a Slack message content to a Cycle bug (it will create an insight linked to that bug) by using from Slack the “…” > “Add to Cycle” > “Feature, Problem, Bug” and map it to the right doc. By doing so you’ll save the feedback processing step. You can either map it to an existing bug or create a new one from there.

Last but not least, let's point out that 50% of our customers prefer to have a different flow for bugs - and don’t use Cycle for that. It’s also an option.

When a bug originating from Cycle makes its way to Linear, are updates on the Linear side then communicated back into Cycle?

Whenever the status in the Linear issue changes from a status category, Cycle related bug also gets updated.

We don't sync updates in the content from Linear to Cycle.

What are your recommendations for Cycle status to work well with Linear?

Here are the statuses we recommend for a simple, clean Cycle - Linear process.