Jira Reviews

Jira is used by my clients across their organizations. They use it for everything related to IT solutions.

Jira has been a good, powerful tool for collaborating across large groups of people.

I use structures as well as the reporting features, personally. The JQL feature is powerful and easy to use. 

The Jira dashboards could be more useful. The dashboards have good widgets but the comparison of data over time or extraction of trends from the data is not easy. This is important for us from a governance perspective. Currently, we do this outside of Jira in Excel manually or using other reporting tools. 

Secondly, it would be useful if the graphs in Jira could be more customizable. If you draw a graph on Excel sheet, you are able to do a lot of customizations. Those kinds of customizations are not possible with the current implementation of Jira. 

When you create structures such as hierarchy, including epics and stories, if you change something, the fields are not correlated. This makes the tracking of changes a manual process.

I have been using Jira for more than a year, but I'm working on a project which has been using it for five years.

This is a stable solution but it can be quite slow. The speed at which Jira operates depends on how it is implemented. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. 

We are using primarily using Jira for the project and issue tracking mostly.

One of the most valuable features is querying because the jQuery function is very good. Additionally, we can create good designs very easily.

There are too many restrictions in Jira. In DevOps, you can access the dashboards easily, but in Jira, you should have more administration rights. In our organization, there are some restrictions on creating dashboards and other features. Everything should be accessible with all access rights for everyone.

Jira should allow you to create and develop pipelines easily. In India, we have to purchase them separately or integrate other data tools. All these tools should be in Jira.

I have used Jira for approximately 12 years.

Jira is stable.

In my experience Jira is scalable.

The technical support has been satisfactory but could be better.

I have used DevOps and the main difference between DevOps and Jira is the test cases. You can have test cases in DevOps, but not in Jira. This is what I have observed in my recent comparison. Jira has jQuery and it is far better than what they have in DevOps. There are some filtration and grouping settings in DevOps which I do not like.

The initial setup is easy.

Jira is expensive and a lot of people are choosing DevOps because they are cheaper, open-source, easy to use, and have basic licenses. Jira should decrease its price to be more competitive.

I rate Jira an eight out of ten.

We have been using Jira for schedule management as well as for making updates to our projects. I mention this in my capacity as a project manager. I most recently used the solution this year and did so for scheduled management of our varied tasks and projects. JIRA is actually used to put together an entire portfolio for each one of the teams, meaning for everybody. The solution listed each of our projects individually, with us needing to provide daily and regular updates. 

A most valuable feature involves the ability to customize the entries and to update them quickly. Unlike what was previously available, the solution allows us to create specific codes and symbols for the individual teams. The new version allows one to customize and to use demarcators. There is a code that can be entered in Align upon completion of a project or task and this apprises the project manager that it is time for its removal. 

Something I do not like about the new version is that there is a need to browse all the way back to the beginning, should a person click on a task that is specifically for his group and wish to go back and look at the other portfolios or people. However, I cannot state definitively if this situation owes itself to the way our team put the site together or to something administrative. When clicking the back button it would take the person to the wrong page, not to the one he desires. One would actually have no choice but to browse back to the portfolio and to find his group again and open it. Again, it is not clear to me if this problem lies with Jira or with the way our team laid out the site. 

I feel Jira is stable. The only hiccup which comes to mind is the one I mentioned, although it is not clear to me if this owed itself to the network we were using or to limitations of the application. Except for this, everything about the solution is stable. The only time a person can not look at the information is when the administrator announces his intention to remove it. 

The scalability is pretty good and we started on this process from the moment we started utilizing the solution. While we had only three teams and three sections, between December and January 15th the developers came together and expanded from three to 76 different tasks across the different teams. By February there were over 300 teams. Expansion is easy and did not just encompass our teams but also provided links to others that were outside of our main team set so that there were reference points available.

I would say the tech support is pretty good. I got back a couple of answers in response to an email I sent out. 

It was quite easy for me to set up my own pages. I had a field day with creating my own test pages and was able to play around with them and simply test out the different settings. Pulling in new documentation was very easy. The same holds true with pulling in attachments and it was, consequently, easy to set up. As well, I was able to set up certain sub-pages for our team for going in and checking JIRA.

There were initially eight people involved in the maintenance of the solution and deployment of updates. They had the people to whom they answered. We are talking about a large-scale effort. Without taking into account the Jira support line, I would say there were around 12 people managing and administering this version. For our specific team, there were around three. They were the actual decision makers. 

I am not in a position to comment on licensing costs. 

Our team does not use the solution exclusively. There are multiple ones which do, although I cannot state how many teams are doing so. I do know that the entire section of our agency is doing so and this accounts for a lot of people, well over a hundred. 

The solution is pretty good and is geared towards those with multiple teams who are using it for the same purposes as us. We use it for providing daily and scrub updates, for which it is really good, as it allows one to track every entry and see when it's entered, timestamp and all. So, if a person has a lot of mission-critical or time-sensitive activities, JIRA is pretty good for tracking and helping to keep everything organized.

While I am still biased towards services at the moment, I rate Jira as an eight out of ten, at it is really good and very functional. 

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.

I use the Jira app, not the desktop version. 

I work at a university and we use Jira to create tickets, epics, and stories. We link Jira to spec documentation with Confluence. We can also link it to TestRail.

Within the university that I work for, there are roughly 4,000 people using this solution — all staff members use it. 

I like that it's integrated with the specs. You don't have to put the specs in a shared folder or a shared server. It's all linked together with Confluence. We just put the specs into Confluence and then link it to the ticket in Jira. Once our developer has finished his development, we can link it to TestRail to create test scenarios, test them, and analyze the results of the test.

It should be connected to ServiceNow. We use ServiceNow for deployments from our test environment to QA, then to production. If it was linked to ServiceNow, it would be perfect — it would be more integrated. Still, at least we can link our test scenarios, specs, and the tickets themselves so we can track the requirements — that's good. We have to use ServiceNow separately to deploy and move corrections from one environment to another.

There are a lot of features that need to be added on top of Jira for management, sprint planning, and agile topology for project management. My project manager says that there are not a lot of features for project management in the agile mode. They have to buy other products to put on top of Jira to be able to properly manage and to track what people are doing.

I have been using Jira for two years. 

I was always able to connect. Once you're inside, it's good. We have never experienced any bugs, glitches, or crashes. 

I think it's scalable. It can be integrated with other products easily. It's not a standalone product. Integration is the most important thing when it comes to scalability. I believe it uses a certain technology to make it even more scalable. 

I've never had to contact support. I've never had a bug or a bug message that I needed to open a ticket for. 

We used to use Remedy, but it didn't have everything that Jira has. Jira supports agile methodology. I used Remedy with waterfall projects, but for agile, Jira is the way to go. I've heard people say that Jira is better than DevOps tools.

I don't think it's complex to set up. The features are standard and come included with the product. You only need to know how to use it, create new Jiras, and how to link them. I don't think the setup is complicated. I've installed Oracle E-Business Suite a lot — that's complicated. Jira is much more direct. 

If you're interested in using Jira, you have to just go ahead and buy it and use it. Try to use all the functions that are available. There's a lot of things to do in Jira. I recommend it. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Jira a rating of seven.

We use it mainly for Scrum management.

Most of the projects which we have taken in were using a waterfall model, which is very hard to convert into an agile or Scrum model. It helped our customers have visibility into requirements and reporting, since they were mostly using spreadsheets. We could help give them a clear cut view of what was happening on ground with development and the test database.

Reporting: It gives a nice report of my backlog and what my team has currently spent its efforts on.

JIRA still has their own backtracking tools. It should have a better visibility into HPE UFT. Most people use functional testing tools, like QTP. They need to improve their integration to make it seamless. 

You can do a lot with the tool but again, but it is not a 100 percent solution for everything. We have a lot of acceptance criteria coming through it, but JIRA doesn't support it. Therefore, we have go to different user stories and break them down. 

Using a cloud instance, it is always stable for us. It is not a problem at all.

We use a cloud instance for most engagement, so scalability has not been an issue.

My company has a 100,000 people, so we always can find someone within our organization who can help fix an issue.

I was not involved in the initial setup.

I understand JIRA is quite expensive.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor:

1. Usability: It should be easy to use. People should not have to undergo a lot of training because it should be intuitive.
2. It should be scalable and a cloud solution. 
3. It should not be expensive. Cost is a major driver because I work in pre-sales.
   

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.

We are using Jira for our test management. We're using it to record our inspecting results and to regulate the evidence in the report. 

The integration could be better in Jira.

I have been using Jira for approximately 15 years.

I have found Jira to be stable.

Jira has been scalable.

There is an annual subscription to use Jira.

I would recommend the solution to others. I have been happy with Jira.

I rate Jira a seven out of ten.