Jira Reviews

We are basically using it to support the UAT tasks. We are also using it for IT support task handling and working together as a team in our company. 

At my workplace, we are using its most updated version.

I'm working in the IT department, and the ticketing system is the most important service for us. We are also using some automation add-ons. It a very good product for handling tickets and tasks and managing processes. It is also very useful and easy to use.

It would be very practical if you can more freely reach the information that is already inside the system. Currently, we have to buy add-ons for it. There is a lot of information in the Jira system that you can handle only through add-ons. You cannot reach such information on your own. If you want to use this information, which is already in the system, you have to buy some add-on to use. For example, information about how much time an assignee is spending on a ticket is there in the system, but you cannot access it without an add-on. JQL is a very good way to reach the data inside Jira. If we can reach more objects, even through JQL, it would be great.

There are a few small functions that we are missing in it. For example, you cannot rate a ticket. If you would like to use a rating for a ticket, you cannot give stars or something like that.

I have been using this solution for more than five years.

We rarely come across any issues. Sometimes, it slows down a little bit, and then usually, we just have to rebuild the index. That's all. It needs lots of resources and CPU memory. If the resources are okay, we don't feel any problem with it.

It is probably easier to scale on the cloud. The on-premise is not so scalable, but if you can define the resources, it works well.

In terms of the number of users, we have around 750 users.

We do not directly contact Atlassian. We have a support company that helps us with any situation.

It is simple to initiate or install the product. It is easy and simple, but if you make some designs inside and build some projects with some automatization, it can be more complex.

We first tried to build the system inside the Docker environment, but it was not a success. So, we switched to the normal installation mode. Installing the product and making it work took just a few days. It included building servers and a database.

We do it on our own, but we have some strong support. We have outside support in case of any problem with it.

In terms of maintenance, you have to do the updates. You have to upgrade the system and handle the add-ons versions. If you build the inside environment in the Jira, you always have to fast forward to the project.

We have two teams to handle the maintenance. For standard maintenance, where you are upgrading the versions, we have an IT professional team for it. For the inside environment of the Jira projects and automation functions, we have a service management team.

If you are using just Jira, it is cheap, but if you start to use it and you feel you need some more services or more functions, then you have to buy add-ons, which can make it expensive.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Jira an eight out of 10. It is definitely not perfect, but it is almost perfect.

I'm overseeing the developments done in Jira. 

The thing that I do like about Jira is that it is relatively easy to understand. In some respects, you don't have to read a lot of ticket information, and you can start pulling down. Everybody is using it, and it works for a lot of people who are just doing enterprise development, cloud-based development, and things like that. It is built for the general audience. 

It is a good defect tracking tool. It has a lot of capabilities and functionalities. There are a lot of graphs and a lot of tracking. It can be sprint-driven if you want. There is a lot of data that you can pull out for estimations. It has got a lot of out-of-the-box functionalities that are kind of like the Jazz platform for out-of-the-box scrum and other such things. 

It also works well with all the integrated tools that you buy.

One thing that I don't like about Jira is that when you do an export, it only allows a thousand issues. So the export feature needs to be better. 

Another thing that I don't like about it is related to epics. There are times when you simultaneously want to have a story tied to two epics, one driving the content change and one driving the format of that evolution. It is not truly a parent-child relationship. It is a single-parent relationship to the stories. It would be nice if you had the capability to tie in multiple epics to a particular story. It is a rare case, but we have that. 

Setting up and executing a triage board should be simpler in the sense of how you do the admin. I come from a regulated space, and there should be easier control of who approves and reviews a system board to oversee all the defects. It should have easier out-of-the-box solutions to allow us to set up a triage board at the system level, the software board level that reports to the system board, or the test level that reports to the software board at the system level. There should be out-of-the-box solutions to migrate that and say that who are the three people on the triage board and if they have these admin privileges. Software review board and test review board would be another thing.

We have also had a problem with the integration with Bitbucket Pull Request data. It is an add-on to the tool, but it is not fully integrated. It is not easy from my perspective. Jira, Bitbucket, and Xray should be smoothly integrated. Xray is pretty good, but Bitbucket is standalone. So, when you pull out the data from a comma-separated value and want to move it into a new database, you have to reenter the data. You somehow lose that Pull Request capability. Pull Request through Bitbucket and the review of the code should be easier to manage. You could use a software package called Crucible to go ahead and mark how you did the review, who reviewed it, and who is the independent reviewer or subject matter expert, but that also should be easier to set up. If they want Jira to be the one-stop shop of the view of all of your deliverables, not just from a defect tracking perspective, but also from a requirement perspective, a code perspective, and a testing perspective, it needs to pull out more data and work better as an integration tool. 

I'm using Jira for the requirement repository. When I do requirements, it would be nice if I had the capability to say that for your requirement, I'm going to give you traceability to support a traceability report from Xray. I'm also going to give a requirement ID number in the ticket. You could use Jama and things like that, but it would be nice if Jira supported that.

We had on-prem and cloud deployments. We had to go to on-prem because of the security measures that were deployed. On-cloud didn't have the same capability. If you have one database on the cloud and the other one is on-prem, they don't talk to each other. It would be nice if you pulled it in and you could switch and say that I want to go on-prem because I got greater security risk.

When we go into the regulated space, I require a lot more integration and capability for tools. It is very hard to get tools to perform at that level because they're built for the general audience. In the regulated space, whether you're in medical devices, avionics, or any other regulated environment, tools have to be validated. I've worked with some companies in the past that had the capability to facilitate that validation. With one of the solutions, you could go ahead and buy a validated suite or a requirement package that will validate the tool for your use, but it is such a small market for Jira around the world that nobody really cares about that.

On their website, they show a bunch of tools that work with Jira, but it would be nice if they gave you examples and said that if you're a regulated medical device or regulated, here's a solution that could work for you. Here is Jira. Here is Crucible, and here is Xray, and here is what it'll do for you. They could also ask how do you do the requirement management? Do you use Jama that ties to Jira? It would be awesome if they had some use cases that showed people how to use Jira as the building block and how to add something on the front end for requirement management, and something on the backend for testing, such as Crucible for the peer reviews and Xray for the test management. People would see it and say that I want to do that.

It would also be nice if it could provide some lock-out capabilities based on your development and environment preferences. For example, you can specify that no one can close a defect until it has been tested, or until a particular task is complete, you can't go to the next phase. It would be cool if you could have something like this set up versus someone configuring it in the background.

They have got 10,000 licenses of Jira, and they have teams around the world deploying it across multiple geographies. All of that works fine.

I haven't used them because this company has its own tech support. So, I've been reaching out to them.

Most people who turn to Jira say that the return on investment is much better. 

Jira and its solution off the shelf are cheap. It is cheap for startups.

It depends on what you want to use Jira for, and what's the problem you're trying to solve. If you're going to do defect tracking and management of an artifact and you have got requirements, code, and tests, and they all got to summarize, you have to then go ahead and take Jira. You can then buy Crucible for the peer reviews and Xray for the test management and get them to work seamlessly with each other. 

I would rate Jira an eight out of ten. It is fairly cheap. For a nine or ten, it would be like DOORS and Jazz platform, but the problem with that is that it would become really expensive.

We are using it for bug tracking and new feature development. We have its latest version.

Using Kanban boards has allowed us to become a flow-based organization versus a sprint-based organization.

Kanban boards are most valuable. 

The reporting capabilities, specifically customized reports, should be improved. The out-of-box reports don't meet our needs. We are big into customizing our reports, and being able to do ad hoc reporting would be good.

I have been using Jira for about three and a half years.

It has been very stable.

I believe it has been scaling. I don't really work with that group, and I am not sure. We've got at least a thousand people on it, and to my knowledge, it has been fine at least for our needs. It is being used extensively in our company. We don't have any plans to increase its usage. 

I have not had any interface with their technical support.

I have used Microsoft Team Foundation Server in the past. I switched to Jira because of the job change. Microsoft Team Foundation Server had a number of features that I don't see in Jira. It had good visual charting. 

I wasn't a part of that group.

There are some good and valuable tool plugins that make it a much better tool. I've got plugins that cover most of the features that were lacking. There are some specific plugins that are targeted for specific kinds of use cases.

I would rate Jira a seven out of ten. It all comes down to reporting. It should have better and more robust reporting.

We started using it in the eComm team for the website and all the digital projects. At the beginning was Jira for software development and the Confluence to move the communication away from our mailboxes. Now, we're also using it for marketing and campaign management. Confluence is now our single source of truth and, in general, we are using it in much more content-based projects.

In many ways: transparency, governance, new comers have a place where to find everything they need, email communications are kept to a miminum, project management is much easier. Also reporting to top management is improved, as there are a lot of nice features like roadmaps and dashboards that can be used for that.

The Kanban boards have been a very valuable feature because they can be either very simple for non-technical teams, but also highly detailed and data-driven for teams that are technical. We use them for both types of team.

Jira is also widely used, so whenever we start a collaboration with an agency/vendor we don't need to spend any time in deciding how are we going to communicate.

It is very flexible as well.

The next-generation software projects are very easy to use, but they lack a lot, and I found quite a few bugs. There are some really basic things that you still cannot do. For instance, setting a due date for a task that you create as mandatory is still not available. That's a bit of a blocker because people, especially those who are not technical, are not going to add anything if it's not mandatory. It's going to be difficult to teach them that they should do it anyway.

I'm trying to integrate these tools, and I'm trying to open them to different types of teams with different types of people. What I've found is that I read about a macro (App) or about a rule and think that it is what I need, but then find that things are not available for the cloud version. There are some features that are available only in the server version and not in the cloud version. I found a couple of add-ons that we were really interested in, and we couldn't use them because we're in the cloud version.

Sometimes when I tried to set up some macros/add-ons/apps, they didn't work well or were not flexible at all. For instance, you can add only one Excerpt macro to a specific page. And in the that area you cannot have a table, which means you cannot excerpt a table, only content. In general, if you follow the instructions they give you, it works, but when you try to adapt it to your actual needs, it often doesn't work anymore.

I've been using Jira for five years.

We started very small in just one team in the company, and then slowly we've started expanding it to other teams. Now, we are trying to roll it out to all the European digital teams.

We have had some big issues with customer support. Lately we have renewed our contract, and it has taken us two months to do so. There is no way to have a phone call with anybody. The chat is not there anymore. So, the only option is email, and these kinds of things are very difficult to communicate through email.

Two of us were contacting two or three different people from their costumer service till we found the one who was willing to go the extra mile and actually listen to what our issues were.

Try to be tidy from day one because it can get messy very easily. Jira is very flexible, and you can still move and migrate stuff around. However, the reality is that nobody is going to have the time later on to migrate and clean-up. I also recommend starting small because at the beginning it can be scary, especially for non-technical people. I'm thinking about the amount of notifications you'll get, for instance.

I would definitely start small and then slowly, while people are getting used to it, keep implementing it and adding features like roadmaps or dashboards. Try to have a plan or a scheme of how you want it to look before you actually start.

It's a great product and is widely used, so I would rate it at 8 on a scale from 1 to 10.

We use Jira every day for tasks like tracking product deployments, mapping it to the tools that we use, and sprint tracking. We also used it for audit purposes, where everybody goes back to that for details about each user story.

Each sprint tracking is done in there, as well as the other product-related activities

All aspects of Jira administration help with respect to QA development and deployment.

This solution allows us to use customized workloads for different projects.

The sprint tracking is really helpful and very convenient.

Scrum boards are very easy to follow and we use them every day.

The roadmap, to understand what our team is going, is quite helpful when it comes to understanding things in a visual format. It provides good visuals such as the Burnup Chart.

Requirement traceability is easier to do with this product.

It integrates well with other tools.

We have been working on integrating Jira with Confluence for the past months but it is not yet working. Having more seamless integration with Confluence would really help us track our product management activity and other product details in one place.

Integration with BitBucket would allow us to have a better deployment process.

I have been using Jira for between four and five years.

This product is very much stable, and we have every tracking option being used.

It scales well, from what we have seen. We have more than 350 users that are in groups, and perhaps another 150 in addition to that. We are onboarding a lot of teams.

When I need support, I contact our in-house technical team. I have not spoken with anybody from outside the organization or anybody from Atlassian.

We were using the on-premises version until a year or two ago when we migrated to the cloud version.

The initial setup was simple and it didn't take much time to complete.

We have an in-house team to deploy and manage our IT solutions. There may have been some outside help initially but everything is now done in-house.

We have an enterprise license that includes cloud service and support.

Overall, this is a very good product and I think that it is the best project management tool. It is used company-wide and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

When you are engaged in an Agile development environment, most of the handling and tracking of the stories are handled in Jira. It can also be used for handling and tracking requests in a ticketing system.

I am a consultant from the quality and design part of the work that we do, and I help people introduce tools into their system. Currently, I am only working with one customer that is using Jira. In the past, I have had five or six who were actively using it.

This solution covers almost all of the types of uses that we have, from an Agile perspective. All of our requirements are supported by it.

This product provides you a good view of the status of your projects.

When I was managing projects that started from epics and moved to multiple tasks, I found that the integration of epics and user stories could have been a little easier. I've seen people struggling to use that aspect of Jira. I think that there is some ease of use that could be brought in to improve certain things.

I have been working with Jira on and off for the past six to seven years.

This is a stable product.

I have not used Jira for really huge projects. I have had groups of between 30 and 40 people and for that size, there were no issues with scalability.

We have asked a couple of questions from technical support and I don't recall having any issues with that. Everything was as expected.

I have not completed an installation myself, but my understanding is that it is quite straightforward. I am familiar with cloud-based deployment but I believe that it can be deployed in a private environment, as well.

One of my customers told me that they were receiving better pricing for a similar tool from Microsoft. Specifically, the total cost of ownership was cheaper with Microsoft.

This is definitely a tool that I would recommend to people, depending on their needs.

In summary, it is a good product and the only room for improvement that I can see is that it needs better integration.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

It is used by the agile teams for product development and feature management.

It provides very good visibility and traceability. You can clearly see each and every part of a process. It is also user-friendly and robust.

It is working well, and there are a lot of add-ons or plug-ins out there that you can use. 

It would be good if we can grant access based on the roles. This is something that Jira can look into. Currently, anyone with Jira access can access everything. Being able to define access based on the roles will give us more flexibility in managing Jira.

I would like to have more reports in Jira. Currently,  eight or nine reports are there. You can use Screen Test to get more reports or data from Jira, but you will have to get more add-ons, plug-ins, and stuff like that. It would be good if they can increase the number of reports.

I have been using this solution for five years.

It is stable. I don't see any instability in Jira.

It is easily scalable. We have around 1,500 users.

I have not directly interacted with Jira's technical support. We have an internal Jira service desk for any issues.

I have used HP ALM, version 11, and it was not so robust. I found Jira to be more robust. In HP ALM, you can define the requirements and test cases and map them, but you cannot see the in-depth requirements, whereas Jira provides more visibility, and you can see each and every part of a process very clearly. It is more open and user-friendly. 

Traceability is very important for the SDLC process, testing lifecycle, and audits, which is one of the key features that Jira provides. It provides detailed traceability so that you can easily know about the sprints and change requests. With HP ALM, you can define requirements only in one or two lines. It is more of a testing tool. It is not a development lifecycle tool.

The initial setup for Jira was done by a third-party vendor, so we did not face any issues. The migration from an older application to Jira was not so easy, and it required a lot of effort.

It was implemented by a third-party vendor. It requires maintenance, but it is not so difficult to maintain. For maintenance and administration, we have an internal Jira service desk.

You need to do upgrades because you tend to have requirements from different stakeholders. You also have different add-ons and plugins, and Jira also keeps on releasing new versions that might be useful.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Jira a seven out of ten because there are some areas to be improved in Jira.

We use this solution because it comes with some of the products that we are using. It is a part of the package. Our usage is quite basic, and we have not finished exploring and deploying the whole solution.

It is a complete solution. It has more features as compared to other tools, especially the open-source one that we use. It is also easy to administer.

Based on the feedback from my admin, it is sometimes difficult to find some of the features. It is not a big deal, but its configuration interface can be improved to make it easy to find things.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is very stable.

We have not deployed it on a very large scale. For now, we have ten users, and it is mostly used for our internal things, but from next week, we're opening it for the community. We'll have a broader experience of the product.

We haven't used their technical support so far.

I have not heard of any complaints about the installation. It takes almost half a day to install. It took some time to configure it for different tools that we use, but the installation was straightforward. There is enough documentation for its installation.

We did it on our own. I only have one admin guy for its deployment. 

We are a regional research and education institute. We're using the free license provided for educational institutes.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Jira an eight out of ten.