Method Not Allowed when trying with Zeebe user task API

Hi Community,
I’m working with the Zeebe REST API to manage the lifecycle of Zeebe user tasks. However, when I attempt to assign a user task, I encounter a 405 Method Not Allowed error. The same issue arises when trying to unassign a user task, resulting in a 405 error as well.

I followed the guidance in this documentation for the migration to Zeebe user tasks. Below is the task configuration I am working with:

  • Implementation Type: ZEEBE_USER_TASK
  • Camunda Version: 8.5 stable, self-managed (downloaded from Camunda GitHub)

Assign a user task screenshot

Implementation type screenshot

Has anyone experienced this issue, or have any suggestions on resolving the error?

Thanks!

@Praveen_Kumar_Reddy - Are you using our Docker configuration? If so, I think this forum thread should help!

Hi @nathan.loding ,Thanks for your response

Yes, I’m using Docker and tried to add the missing configs to zeebe env in the docker-compose.yaml and recreated the container

The roles in the decoded JWT seems good

Assigning and unassigning the zeebe user task is giving me the same error

Here’s my docker-compose and it’s source from github
docker-compose.yaml (16.4 KB)

The Zeebe REST API is on port 8080. Your screenshots shows 8081.

@kristoffer.jalen ,Thanks for your insights

@nathan.loding Thank you for your help. Changing the port to 8088 resolved the issue for me.

I’ve learned that the Zeebe REST API is now assigned to a new port.

I was expecting a 404 error due to the wrong port, rather than a 405, because the Tasklist REST API doesn’t include the /user-tasks path. Any insights on why this happened?

Great! You can mark the answer as a “solution”, which will make it appear at top of the thread for others.

@kristoffer.jalen , Sure I’ll mark that

Any insights on this?

@Praveen_Kumar_Reddy - that’s a really good question, I would have expected a 404 also. I’ll raise this feedback with the engineering team!

1 Like

@Praveen_Kumar_Reddy - thanks for the feedback! They’ve corrected this for the 8.6 release, and are investigating to see if it makes sense to backport it to other supported versions.

@nathan.loding, Thanks for reporting this to the team and getting back to me. Much appreciated! Glad to hear it will be corrected in 8.6, and great that the team is investigating backporting options.

This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.