Jira Reviews

The solution allows us to escalate issues from the end-user customer very easily. For example, if they're trying to access our PayPal page, and they're getting an error, we will do the basic troubleshooting. If the problem persists, then we will file the case and we will send all the stuff to reproduce the issues, including the ID, everything, using the Jira tool. We will create the task and it will go to the Level Three engineering team. They'll create that bug and route it to the Product Development team. Since the time I've raised the ticket, there are lots of options and there are lots of products that we may be using. That includes understanding what is the issue, what is the SLA, what is the issue criteria, et cetera. We can create and submit issues based on multiple types of criteria.

I can collaborate on issues that I've escalated very easily, even if they were escalated to different groups. I can segregate as well. It makes it easy to track bugs and issues. 

My experience with Jira has been great. Jira can track bugs and records improvements clearly. 

It's easy to escalate the issues to the product development team. 

It's not that difficult to create and file an issue. It is very user-friendly.

The ability to include attachments and assign reporters is great. We're able to easily delegate the task. That's extremely helpful. 

In every email, there is a way to track who is looking at a specific issue. If you look into Jira, there will be a crystal clear communication chain from the start to end of any issue.

In Jira, sometimes developers are not getting alerts when Jira is moving out of the SLA to the product development team. Or, for example, if you're sending a Jira ticket to me, I should get an alert if I've not worked on the ticket for a long time. I should always get an alert within 24 hours. For example, there should be three kinds of alerts. If a Jira ticket is raised and does not have any steps, for example, if I'm not assigned, it should be in green. If one day goes by, it should be in yellow. If the SLA is about to end, it should be in red. That way, I will know what needs to get attention. I'd be able to say "Oh, I should work on my task." There should be some color-coded alerts to keep me informed in a more visual way.

Sometimes I might get an attachment from the user through email that I need to download and save to my local desktop. What feature I would like from Jira is the ability to have an attachment field option open Outlook. Right now, when you click an attachment, you can only attach the items which are stored on your desktop or documents that have been downloaded. However, there should be an option to attach a file to a Jira issue directly from Teams or Outlook.

They should offer free online training courses to users. 

I've been working with this solution for seven years. While I joined the organization seven years ago, the company had already been using Jira for quite some time. 

The stability is good and the solution follows the agile methodology. We've never had issues with its reliability. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is good. 

It's my understanding that the solution can scale. 

We have more than 5,000 people using the solution right now. They include IT specialists, product support, developers, product owners, technical lead, and architects.

I have not faced any Jira issues. I have not raised any tickets to the Jira team directly. It works very well.

The company may have previously used ServiceNow, however, as I recall, it is difficult to expand, and therefore the company has used Jira for quite a long time. 

I'm from technical support. I'm not a part of the development team and therefore have not helped implement the solution. Therefore, I cannot speak to how easy or difficult the process is. 

Jira maintenance is taken care of by the product maintenance team and the change management team. While we own the product, they respond to it. 

I'm not aware of the pricing or costs. It's not an aspect of the solution I deal with directly.

I am aware, however, there is a bit of a cost to do the online training.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

You can use both cloud and on-premises deployments. Cloud deployments can be on various clouds, including Amazon, Microsoft Azure, et cetera. We are using GCP, for example. 

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

We are using Jira for ticket management.

The solution has helped my companies efficiency with managing tickets throughout the life cycle.

We have gone through several version changes and some of those changes have not been intuitive. There was a learning curve and we had some complaints internally about the changes, such as the new interface.

The solution could improve the Agile reports. They do have quite a bit of reports already, but additional reports would be a benefit.

I have used Jira within the past 12 months.

Jira is stable.

I have found Jira to be scalable.

We have a few hundreds using Jira in my organization. They consist of developers, project managers, and testers.

Whether we increase usage of the solution depends on what each team wants to do. There is some level of common solution approach, but I don't know for sure whether this is the direction that everybody is wanting to adopt.

We had to reach out to their support a few times. The support was good, I did not have any issues with them.

The initial setup was not difficult.

We have an IT team that supports the solution.

My advice to others wanting to implement this solution is to utilize the SaaS solution unless it is required not to. Having your own instance running in your data center or private cloud requires your own staff and resources to maintain and upkeep. It can be quite time-consuming work. Unless you are invested in something like that, there is a benefit of just using a SaaS solution.

I rate Jira a seven out of ten.

We use Jira for multiple uses; project management, task management, and we are starting to use it for release management.

The feature that I have found most valuable is its ease of use. I don't need to train anyone to use it, I just give them access and they can use it to add comments, move their issues, change the status, monitor, read, and so on. For these results, it is very helpful. I also like the customization that we had for the workflows for the different issues, it's quick and easy to customize. The reporting is also easy and the dashboards that they provide are really helpful and simple. It does not need a lot of experience with reporting and presentation to get to what you need. Also, most of the advanced reports that you need to create can be exported as Excel files.

I have been watching an issue develop. There is a difference between their cloud and their  server versions. The next-gen project, which is an advanced feature that allows you to visualize the road map of your delivery over multiple products and over time, is not available yet for the sever version. It appears there in the list, but it's still not right. I've tried to use it many times and I am watching the device show their tracker, but it seems they intentionally want this to increase the utilization of the cloud instead of the server. It is really a nice feature and it's a shame that we don't have it.

Additionally, it would be really nice if they added some custom reports so that you could build your own report through any open source or commercial plug-in like Crystal Reports. That would be much easier for them to accelerate. You can create a report template and use it frequently.

There are a few features I would like to see in the next release. For example, the layouts could be easier to configure on the screens. I know it's easy to customize. For each issue type you can create and modify your screen. But it would be easier if you could enlarge, copy, clone, and visualize them in a model in a visual way. It's really hard for me as an admin to compare different screens or even to copy one screen with one additional field. I believe that is creating a lot of confusion for end-users because usually admins are looking at each field independently, where it's located, in which position, and which screen. So that all needs to be improved from an administration point of view to make it easier to visualize and compare between the screens.

I have been using Jira for almost a year now.

In terms of stability, it is fine.

The initial setup is easy and straightforward. The deployment is very easy. It just took one server.

It took one day to set up the database and then start the configuration. That is straightforward. And I believe they have a newer deployment model that they can deploy on Docker and other container platforms.

I did it myself with some help from other team members.

Jira is an amazing tool, but to get the process streamlined is a challenge. So don't start from Jira. Start with your process first. Agree on the workflow, identify all the stakeholders, and then from there you can go ahead with Jira and implement anything.

On a scale of one to ten, I give Jira a 10.

Everything already provided is perfect. We are using Jira perfectly for one year now and it's absolutely great.

I have worked with Jira for agile scrum projects. Jira is a good tool that helps you track and monitor all your stories, scrum updates, and Definition of Doneness (DoD). We can track everything we need to track and pull the reports from the Jira tool. Based on the team's activity, we can monitor, track, and update the tasks we have assigned through Jira. We also use Jira for sprint planning.

The most valuable feature of Jira is the reporting feature, which allows us to track our team's tasks. You can export and play around with the reports. In the defect tracking tool, you can pull the data and generate reports with a nice graph. It's very user-friendly. The solution's user interface is intuitive and easy to use.

Sometimes, Jira becomes slow when more people use it. Then, we have to close it and log in again. The solution's stability could be improved, and it could be made more robust.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

Around 2,000 users use Jira in our organization.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for scalability.

The initial setup of the solution is very simple. You can install Jira as a standalone solution. Deploying the solution on the cloud is very, very easy, and then you can access it from anywhere on the cloud.

I have used Micro Focus Quality Center, which is purely a defect management tool. We can also use Jira as a defect management tool. When you compare both tools, Jira is now the best tool for defect management and running scrum projects. You can even expose the Jira APIs to do automation.

If you find a defect, you can automate the process of logging in to Jira and erasing the incident. When you find a defect while running JMeter scripts, you can take the APIs and automate it to save time. The automation process can be done through Jira because it exposes its APIs to third parties to integrate with other tools.

You can expose Jira APIs and integrate the solution with other tools. You can have your own dashboard using the APIs. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I am using Jira for some programming-driven planning and PI planning system, but I have just started using it for that. I am primarily using it for some projects.

I'm serving as an enterprise agile coach, so I work with a team to help them use Jira. I'm not really sure what the exact data subjects are, but I mostly look at what the team is doing and if they have updated, then they let me know. I'm not using Jira for my own instances, but for my team's. I'm helping the scrum masters and the product owners.

The solution is deployed on cloud.

In terms of scrum teams, I find that usually, the product backlog depends on charts and especially reports like Sprint Reports. I find the reports to be very useful. With regard to SAFe Agile, I was looking at having a proper program board. So far, I have tried using the portfolio feature. Something that I have been looking to understand or learn more about is how to integrate Scaled Agile and their work types into the Jira.

I'm still exploring the solution. I think the knowledge is a challenge because most people are used to Jira for teams, but not Scaled Agile. I think that is an issue with awareness. We are looking for some YouTube videos and help pages on finding that. Maybe there are features, but sometimes we aren't aware of them. We are still in the exploration stage.

I would love to see transparency in terms of how the program is displayed when you are working in multiple teams, especially how the dependencies could be tracked. The most important thing at the moment is that it is easy to do.

Something I would like to see improved is the traceability feature. When you have a user story, if you can see all the test cases, it would be an improvement if you could see any design documents or any change management. If you can see the traceability nicely, that is also something that we are looking for. Today we can link and do things like that, but sometimes the solution has a bit of a challenge with attaching test cases, so I think we have to use some plugin. Traceability with the test cases could be improved.

I have worked with this solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

I'm not able to comment on the scalability because I work with different types of teams. Some teams are really big, and they haven't said that they've faced any challenges. I haven't specifically asked, so I'm not very able to comment on that because I don't know for sure.

I'm working with a couple of teams made up of 20-30 users or 100-150 users, and maybe more for certain accounts.

I haven't had a lot of experience with technical support, but for the questions that I have raised, I received a pretty quick response, so I'm happy with that.

Setup wasn't that big of a challenge.

Implementation was done by Jira administrators, which was good.

The license is yearly. It is a large, long-running program.

Some of my teams have been using Version 1 and Rally. Because of that, I have been exposed to those tools for some extent.

My experience is much more with Jira. That's why I tend to go for Jira, but we haven't used many other solutions. Based on teams and what the people are saying, they find Jira to be more user-friendly. For Scaled Agile, I have also heard that they have found certain features in Rally more useful. But I don't know, I haven't used Rally to that extent.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10.

I'm from a QA background and we used to do automation. It was far easier to link JIRA with our QA automation frameworks because JIRA has a lot of public APIs that we could use. Also, the burndown charts and the ability to manage different frameworks of the adjoint model are helpful. We could use scrum in one project or Kanban. So it was easy to manage the transition from one framework to another. Those are the things I found useful, but I haven't seen the case of TFS yet.

JIRA could simplify the query mechanism. Running a query for tasks, stories, and so on is far easier in TFS. The algorithm is easier. In JIRA, it's a bit complex in terms of what advanced search queries we use. Sharing them is also a problem. Because TFS is on the cloud, we can easily save that query and share it with our team members. So that is one area where JIRA has some room for improvement.

JIRA is pretty much stable.

JIRA is far more scalable in terms of using different frameworks, burndown charts, dashboards, etc. The size of your company doesn't matter. JIRA has the capability to work for smaller organizations and larger ones as well.

JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for. There were certain areas where we were looking for a specific API. And also they have a lot of options in terms of packages that you can choose according to your company's needs. They had custom packages available. You do not have to buy a larger package. They have smaller packages for smaller organizations. So that's something exciting.

JIRA is fairly easy to set up. That is not a problem.

JIRA's pricing is very economical. I would say that JIRA is a great deal more economical than Microsoft. So pricing-wise, JIRA is also good.

I would rate JIRA nine out of 10. From a technical background, it depends on what you would like to use — which stack you want to go for. In other words, it depends upon the kind of infrastructure you have right now. For example, say you are developing software on Microsoft's .Net framework, then you are obviously already using Visual Studio and Microsoft Stack. In that case, it's a lot easier to integrate with TFS. But if you are using open-source solutions, like a Java platform, you can go for JIRA. So it totally depends upon the technical capability, or technical infrastructure one has.

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.

The solution is primarily used in a scrum setting for creating all the features, topics, epics, stories, backlogs, and helps manage the scrum.

It's a very powerful product. It works well with Confluence. It interacts with it well.

There are very advanced features in Jira compared to, for example, ServiceNow.

You can record your unit testing, regression testing, UATs, et cetera. With a wider universe of applications, it's very flexible. 

I'm not totally a business analyst, however, a business analyst, can really, really use it very deeply due to the fact that you can register the results and create your test cases, run them, and document the results. All the testing is very advanced in Jira and it's very nice.

While it's very powerful, it's very complex sometimes. You can do many fancy things and have connections between features. With so many options, it's easy to get lost and it's not as easy to be on top of all the features and changes. In that sense, ServiceNow is easier to keep up with. Its configuration is more complex than ServiceNow.

The interdependencies between objects sometimes are not easy to trace back and to have a clear view of. That's why starting with small configurations is very important; we don't create very complex structures between objects in Jira. That said, sometimes when updating a history that was linked to an epic we would not understand why the epic didn't change when we changed the history. The relation sometimes can become complex. This is not a problem of Jira per se, it's a problem of how you configure Jira.

I worked with the solution for a while, however, I stopped using it. My last project was about 12 months ago.

The solution is stable. I cannot recall any issue with bugs or glitches. Jira never went down. It was reliable.

It is a scalable product. It can be applied with much more deepness, especially for developers.

Normally if I had some questions and issues on how to do what on Jira, I'd look for local support. We didn't have any Jira consultants or anything like that.

We also use ServiceNow. We use both products in the same way.

The configuration process is pretty complex. It's a pretty advanced product. You'll want to understand how to use it and what you want it to do before jumping in.

I would advise potential new users to start with simple cases in terms of configuration and to build on top of that in order to add complexity by identifying the need and not working from scratch.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. You need to get used to using it. It's a solution that can et very complex.