Jira Reviews

I work for an insurance company that has developers who need to be tracked. We're working on converting the spreadsheet into a Kanban flow environment. I'm the program manager/master. 

The solution is very powerful, has many good features, in particular a good reporting capability. I like many of the features, and I have the benefit of having a very skilled Jira administrator helping me out because I'm a PM. 

The solution is not as intuitive as it should be and you have to play around with the environment quite a bit before you get a handle on how things work. One of the issues is that it's usual for a ticket to have a primary developer on it and other people supporting, but that's not possible in Jira. They have a very thick policy and a ticket can only have one assigning, although it may be possible to do it as a number coding, I'm not sure. I'd like to see the solution include a feature whereby you can link stories visually, to explicitly show the connection between a user story and a task. 

I've been using Jira for several years. 

Scalability of the solution seems fine.

Technical support could be improved. When you submit a ticket, it can take two or three rounds before you get what you're looking for. I send the ticket and receive an irrelevant response, which doesn't help. You can go backwards and forwards with them and never get there which is very frustrating. I'm not sure if the user community is that helpful. I've submitted two questions but haven't yet received a response. 

The initial setup was quite complex. 

The solution is fairly good at doing a lot of things, and is potentially very good, but it takes some getting up to speed on. I've used a product called Kanban Flow, and that's very intuitive, very easy to use. Jira seems to be more complicated and requires having specialists on board so that if you have a problem, you can get help immediately without having to go through the ordeal of submitting a ticket and waiting two or three days to get a response, which may not be helpful at all. 

I rate this solution a five out of 10. 

I'm working on creating test cases and one test. I also have an overview of the Sprint.

In general, the GUI is nice. 

The part when it comes to the testing area is a bit hard to handle. The screen is too small, you can't really read what you're typing in, and it's only for the testing area. It looks like they have pressed in more than the UI system could handle to display it properly.

I have been working with Jira for about eight months.

Jira seems like a stable product, but sometimes I'm losing data.

As a totally different team does the entire setup, I don't know if it's scalable. But we have about 150 users.

To be quite honest, at the end of the day, a tool is just a tool. For me personally, it's hard to say this tool is much better than the other. From just what I know so far, Micro Focus Octane looks a bit more modern. But I don't know which Jira version we're using at the moment. Octane looks a bit more integrated, it looks a bit newer, but would I buy a tool because of that? Certainly not.

I would recommend Jira for Sprint management. But when it comes to documentation of manual tests, I would say, "Okay, you can buy it if you want to have one package, but you can also have a look at something different."

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Jira a solid eight.

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 are mainly using it for project management and issue tracking. It is used by development, QA, and IT operations. It really goes through the whole gamut of project management.

We are not using its latest version. We are usually a little bit behind on versions.

Jira is a pretty capable product, and a lot of features are valuable. We value being able to set up separate projects and configure teams in them, set up sprints, and manage our sprints with its history tracking. These are all very useful features. It has been a very popular product for our work.

Because I am a developer, I would like integration with Git Source Code Management so that for tickets, we can reference the code where the change has happened and where the issue is. This feature might be there, and I probably haven't discovered it.

I have been using this solution for probably six years.

Its stability has been very good. Every once in a while, we have a problem, and the service stops working. I don't think we have a very robust installation of it, but if there is an issue, it is back online very quickly.

Most of the issues are probably related to the server needing patching or something else. It may not be running on the appropriate size hardware. I know it is not a well-funded product at our office.

It is impressive. We have all our projects on it, and we haven't really had reports of any issues. We haven't yet stretched it to its limitations, but it has managed to meet our requirements, even in this minimal deployment. I am pretty impressed. 

I didn't directly contact them, but I am sure at some point we have. We usually have a contact person, and we pay for the full support.

We are adopting multiple products, such as ServiceNow, but they do different things and are for different purposes. There is a talk about replacing Jira with ServiceNow, and we're not too happy with it because we all liked Jira, but sometimes this kind of stuff happens. ServiceNow does have crossover features, but it gets into problems for us when changing from one system to another.

I didn't set it up, but I haven't heard of any issues with the implementation of it. It seems to be very straightforward.

I would recommend this product. Overall, it is a good product. It supports scrum and agile developments. It has a lot of benefits that can be applied very quickly in organizations.

I would advise others to do a test installation and make sure that it fits their needs. Experiment with the multitudes of features that it has. I know there are lots of modules. There are probably many features that we are not using. 

I would give it very high marks. I would rate Jira a nine out of ten. There is always something you could improve on it.

Our primary use case is for our own network operations, and integrating via API with our customers network operations teams.

It created excellent data points and summary with up-to-minute information.

The informatics is the most valuable feature. It captures what we need.

The user interface could be better, but the stability is definitely there and the accuracy is good.

The GUI should have much better features like more graphical illustrations. There are some cases or benchmark data that we are trying to capture and customised into a graphical pie chart summary dashboard, but unfortunately JIRA is not able to do that.

We implemented JIRA six months ago.

The stability is good. We have around ten users as a start. 

Impressive

We have contacted technical support. Their response was prompt. 

The initial setup is not that difficult, but it's not that simple either. That is why it took us  about three to six months to get it up and finalized.

Via our in-house.

Right now the price is fair but once they move to the cloud, that model may not be attractive anymore.

It is an excellent tool to summarize and get our stacks of data into a platform for operational overview and interface tracking. It is very useful for us. 

I would rate JIRA a nine out of ten. Not a ten because of the GUI pie chart. The beauty of the dashboard is not perfect, so I subtracted some points.

Our primary use case is ALM, which is very well supported by Atlassian.

We have realized an improvement of 30% in terms of the duration of our small projects (six months with three to four people).

The most valuable feature is the full integration between Work management, Source code management, and Test Automation.

This integration allows a full traceability during the development processes, which is mandatory for some industries like automotive, or security

The hierarchy for Jira tickets is too flat.

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.
   

We are using it for software development tracking, bug tracking, feature tracking, and so on. 

We are using the cloud version from Atlassian, and we have its latest version.

The way we can define and customize the search queries for the tickets in Jira is most valuable.

The way to configure it can definitely be improved. It is very difficult and complex to configure. Its configuration should be simplified.

I don't have any requirements for new features. It is a standard system, and we use just a part of the functionality.

I have been using this solution for five to ten years. I use it on a daily basis.

Its stability is good. In the last five years, I haven't seen any outages. 

We are a very small team, and we don't have any requirements for scalability.

I have not contacted their technical support.

The initial setup and the out-of-box features and functions are very straightforward. I would rate it a five out of five in terms of ease. You can just create an account and start to use it. 

It is a cloud solution offered by Atlassian. There is no on-premises setup, and it doesn't require any maintenance from our side.

It is subscription-based, and we probably pay yearly. I would rate it a four out of five in terms of price.

I would rate Jira an eight out of ten.