RFCs are a way for Atlassian to share what we’re working on with our valued developer community. It’s a document for building shared understanding of a topic. It expresses a technical solution, but can also communicate how it should be built or even document standards. The most important aspect of …

Hi, Would it be possible to explore using the Marketplace listing for partners to provide this information? Since most customer-facing details are already surfaced there, it feels like a natural place to handle this. It could also help keep a clearer separation between app deployment and customer …

“Status” should also include a clear way to communicate to the customers if migration is blocked by the platform limitations.

The URL approach shifts hosting, design and maintenance burden to every partner individually, with zero consistency for admins comparing dozens of apps. Instead, add a structured status field to Marketplace listings (“migrating by X / no action needed / contact vendor”). You control the UX, we contr…

We’re OK with the URL. We already have a page where we inform customers for some specific upcoming changes (custom fields, REST API tokens, manual installs in our case). So having it also visible trough the marketplace is a plus in terms of communication for us. To answer the other questions: Yes,…

A status flag would be helpful, especially if one of the values conveys the message: “We want to move to Forge but we are blocked by Atlassian”. Customers who are requiring Forge adoption may not see anything beyond a “not ready yet” status or realize that a vendor’s inability to move to Forge is ou…

Hey Janette, Thanks for the feedback and for raising these points. For this proposal, our current thinking is to surface partner-provided URLs directly in the in‑product messaging, so admins can go from the message straight to the source of information without needing to move through another surfa…

Thanks for your feedback on this. We do acknowledge that there are cases where migration may be blocked by current platform limitations. As an aside, we’re actively working to be more transparent with partners about where we are drawing the line for Connect to Forge work before end of support, so yo…

Hey Nick, Thanks for your feedback. We hear the concern around creating a consistent experience for admins. Our current thinking is to explore adding the structured status options directly into the in‑product messaging (e.g. “migrating by X”, “no action needed”, “contact partner”), so that admins …

Hey Edwin, Thank you for your feedback, it aligns with our current direction of surfacing a partner provided URL as the primary method to link customers from the in-product messaging to your migration information. As always, open to any other feedback that may come across your mind.

Hey Scott, It seems like there’s an appetite for conveying structured status options so we will take this on board. As mentioned above (and I can also see that you have already been engaging), we have this process set in motion to give partners explicit clarity on what will be delivered by Connect …

RFC-129: Surfacing Partner Migration Plans to Site Admins for Apps Running on Connect

General Request for Comments (RFC)

tobias.viehweger May 20, 2026, 8:30am 20

Hi @EshaaSood,

the out-of-scope listed “Immediate deployment of this feature/customer messaging”, but we are now seeing this UI rolling out? This is super invasive…