Jira Reviews

We use it for project and sprint planning and day-to-day bugs. We also use it for documentation, engineering, and enhancements tickets and for creating the feeds, which are like new features.

We are most probably using its most recent version.

It has been very helpful for feature enhancements, release planning, and sprint planning. We have been using it for creating bugs, enhancements, and all the tasks for a sprint. It helps us in looking at the quality aspects of the product along with the volume, burndown rate, and a lot of other things.

As an engineer, I like that it provides you blocks to put in comments, code, etc. It helps in giving better information. 

It is very configurable, and we can do whatever we want. Jira dashboards are also good, and we use them extensively. We also use the tracking mechanism extensively. 

Another thing that I like a lot about Jira is that in the dashboard, you can plug the modules that you want. You can enable certain sections. For example, you can show trend history, open Jira tickets, etc. Some of the managers have created a dashboard for each engineer. So, it allows you to do all sorts of things.

There should be a way to look for specific comments. When we have thousands of comments on a Jira ticket, there is no way to look at the comments of a specific type. In the comments, if there is a way to put a tag, it would be helpful. For example, when there are a lot of lengthy discussions happening on a particular ticket, there could be a conclusion tag or something like that to indicate a conclusion. It would help in sorting the comments based on a certain category, such as conclusion. I should be able to tag a comment with something like ##dev_conclusion##, and someone looking at the comments should be able to expand all the comments and search based on this tag. Some of our tickets can go up to 100 or 200 comments, and it currently takes a lot of effort for someone to go through them. It would be good if there was a way to preview the comments.

We want Jira to be the single tool that people use. We lose a lot of information when working at the ticket level in Jira. We don't want to have discussions in Confluence and design docs somewhere else. Currently, we make some decisions outside, and we make some decisions in Jira, and there is no combined way. There should be a way to integrate documentation into this, and I should be able to directly update the documents. They can also incorporate a review mechanism for documentation. I should be able to assign a sub-comment to someone to say, "I'll respond to it," or I should be able to tag someone to say, "Can you please look at it?" We should be able to use a workflow. There should be some built-in intelligence where when there is a design document in a Jira ticket, the signoff should be done by certain people. Currently, the documentation is completely separate. If there is a way to get the documentation into this whole workflow, it would be useful.

I have been using this solution for seven or eight years.

Its stability is really good. There is no doubt about it. Sometimes, we have performance issues. That's mainly because a lot of people have standup meetings between 8 am to 9 am, and everybody is using Jira at that time. The number of connections is at a peak in the morning hours. If I was a Jira development engineer, I would be thinking about a mechanism to ease that. Other than that, it is pretty stable and reliable.

We didn't have any issues with scalability. We create hundreds of tickets every day. We have between 1,000 to 2,000 users across all departments. It is being used extensively, and its usage might increase.

I didn't have any contact with their technical support. We have a Jira maintenance team. We have a Slack channel, and if there is an issue, we send it there, and the team looks at it.

I'm not a part of the team that takes care of its deployment. We are a big organization, and I am an end-user of it.

I would advise having proper planning because you don't want to clutter your Jira. Without proper planning, you would go on creating a lot of labels and other things, which would be of no use. You need to do release planning and then accommodate things into Jira. 

A lot of companies have a separate release planning team, and then there is a separate Jira infrastructure team. All these teams should think and work together. Otherwise, everybody would be creating their own tags, which won't make sense. I might create a tag for daily bugs, and someone might create another tag for the same thing, which would result in cluttering.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. Jira is an amazing tool. There is no doubt about it. We have no thoughts of using any other tool.

We are using Jira for scrum, specifically for Agile Scrum. Most of the tasks are in Jira, including the dashboards and reports.

For now, we are using Jira for the scrum. We are quite happy with this as it allows for task management and report generation.

We can query the tickets and create dashboards based on these queries. This functionality is helpful for monitoring project status and tracking bugs. We are using Jira for scrum within the Agile framework. Tasks and dashboards are in Jira, which also assists in report generation.

I am unable to query based on the subtask and link by issue, which can be improved.

I have been using Jira for more than five years because my previous company also used it.

For stability, I would rate Jira as eight out of ten.

For scalability, I would rate Jira as seven out of ten.

I have not contacted Atlassian's technical support since another team handles these issues.

Positive

I have tried Trello, which is open-source and free, however, Jira is much more powerful.

The setup of the project in Jira is handled by our scrum master, who is not a very technical person, yet manages it efficiently.

For small companies, Jira is not affordable, leading them to use Trello or other free software. Jira is quite acceptable for medium to enterprise-level companies due to the features it offers compared to its pricing.

I have not used Asana, but I have used Trello. I find Jira to be much more powerful.

Overall, I rate Jira eight out of ten. I am quite content with its features and capabilities.

It's pretty much for engineering development, Scaled Agile purposes for engineering development, for managing basically the epics and the stories and the capabilities and everything that we have to deliver in sprints. We're not using it as a ticketing tool or anything like that, for operations. We're using it purely for managing the development stuff in a Scaled Agile manner.

The solution is easy to use. It's pretty dynamic. It allows us to basically handle everything that we need in terms of a backlog, and we're trying to do it in an organized manner, so we know who works on what and how to size the story points so we can ensure that our epics burn down from sprint to sprint.

In terms of the general way that the tool functions, it seems like it's a pretty good fit-for-purpose for what we're trying to do. We've never thought about replacing it with another technology. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. 

The stability is pretty good.

There are a few things about it that I think need to be improved in terms of the ability to build reports. We would like to be able to use the data from Jira to help drive Gantt chart roadmap-type views of not only what we're building, but rather where we're going.

What we've elected to do in a couple of cases is just pull the data out of Jira and then pull it into Power BI so that we can try to get some of the more sophisticated information that we want out of it. We actually experimented with building portfolio views so we can see stuff in real-time. In some ways, it's okay. In some ways, it's just a little lethargic for our purposes.

We'd like to be able to manage things in real-time and by looking at stuff. We're doing PI planning, Program Increment planning, and that kind of stuff, and it's not always a good facilitator for that. We tend to pull it out and put it into other tools to manage that, and then we get it back into Jira as that's our system of record for where all the stories are kept. That's probably the biggest headache with it.

For some of the portfolio stuff that we did, the queries were so complicated that it was just taking forever. It was like watching paint dry for the results to come back. We would be in a meeting and then we'd hit a refresh and you're waiting for what seems like an eternity.

The solution could use API integration to take feeds from other tools so that we can read them better. We got one camp using an ITBM tool from ServiceNow. We have Jira running in this other area, and having an API between the two so we could actually collaborate between the two tools. However, API integrations with other tools would be helpful so we could either take data out of it or put data in it, thereby making it more of a data-driven platform that integrates nicer with other platforms. That, I think, would be something I would like to see.

I've been using the solution for four years or so. 

I haven't heard people really complain that it's unstable. We haven't had very many performance issues with it. I don't know if it was a network problem or what it might have been, however, I haven't really heard people talk about performance problems other than when we were trying to use it for portfolio views and that got kind of weird as queries were just complicated. Beyond that, the stability has been fine.

The issues that we have with scalability aren't necessarily with the tool as much as it's how we're using it. We're a big company so there are a lot of people using Jira, however, we don't really see how the projects correlate across different activities within the company. When we're trying to get two integrated roadmaps and trying to get to a point where we're collaborating, doing inter-sourcing of a solution, and we're all in Jira, there are times where we're in it and yet we can't collaborate and work together, and so we start replicating things across the two projects.

I don't know how much of that is the issue with using it how we are versus the product itself though. 

We have 8,000 to 10,000 people using the solution currently. That's across many departments. We are a company of around 150,000 people. There may be people using it that I am not even aware of. I only have visibility of what I'm doing and what I'm exposed to in terms of integration with offerings and that kind of stuff. I know when we were managing licenses, we used to have a DevCloud team. For their scope, it was in the 8,000 to 10,000 user range. 

The solution is being pretty extensively used. Likely usage will grow as the company grows and takes on new business. I don't know if it's going to organically grow exponentially as it's already being used where it needs to be used and currently we're only using it for development activities across the different offerings and platforms. It's not used as a day-to-day run-and-maintain ticketing system to manage customers or issues or anything like that. I'm sure there'll be some incremental growth as we take on new business and grow as an organization.

We use Jira. We use Confluence as an extension of that, and then we also use ServiceNow, the ITBM capabilities of ServiceNow as well.

We had a DevOps team that ran our cloud environment, and they basically spun up a project for us, and it was pretty straightforward. It's not like we were installing it in the cloud. People just said, "Here you go, and you can just start using it." After that, we just created a project for what we were doing, and then we were on our way. I wasn't really involved with any part that was problematic or anything.

In terms of maintenance, pretty much everybody is maintaining their own instance. We've got somebody that manages what's in the cloud for the company, however, it's pretty much hands-off in terms of day-to-day support issues. We had a few people that were supporting it when there were problems, however, it's just a handful from what I understand.

We're just customers and end-users.

We are likely using the latest version of the solution. I don't know what the latest version of Jira is, however, I'm pretty confident we are.

The advice I would give is it's not a solution for a novice person that doesn't know Scaled Agile. Users will get out of it what they put into it, and if you don't know what you're doing you could set yourself up for a nightmare when you're using the tool. My advice is that the better you structure yourself and understand Scaled Agile and how you want to set up the project the more successful you'll be at using it for your organization's purposes. If you're going in there as a novice that doesn't understand anything about Scaled Agile you could create a mess for yourself and then it won't give you the value you are seeking.

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

Jira is used for all the project management, on all the stages of project management. So then we create a Kanban board and move on to creating the stories.

We create the story points, break down the requirements, and then create the Sprint accordingly. Based on that, we can manage in Jira how many user stories we will pick in what Sprint. And based on the dependencies of the user stories, this is the flexibility that Jira provides. Then we have also got various, you know, sub-tasks, which we have to complete to accomplish the DoD (Definition of Done). We can mark the Sprint as complete when these particular tasks are completed. So that gives very good monitoring of the project where the project is

going on.

When it comes to the testing part, so testing is end-to-end on Jira. We can take the user stories based on the acceptance criteria. The test cases are created in Jira, and the business analyst team reviews those test cases. Based on their feedback, the test cases are updated. Those test cases are being executed. So there is clear tracking of the test execution, and all the test cases are also linked with the user storage. We have end-to-end tracking of what test case is executed for what user story. So that is the best part of Jira.

The monitoring, flexibility and tracking are really good in Jira.

When we use the plugin in Jira so, there are two different systems which we are working on, Jira and the X-ray plugin. The X-ray plugin should be incorporated into Jira because we have to fetch two reports. One report is faxed through Jira, and one can be faxed through X-ray. So there needs to be clarity about which the Jira team should reflect.

I have been using Jira for eight years. 

Jira is a stable product. I have seen the growth in the solution’s stability for the last eight years. The current version is quite stable and is a robust system.

Overall, the solution is scalable. Jira is quite easy to scale. If we have five projects working on Jira and we have about five more projects to be incorporated, it's easy to install Jira for those five projects as well. Presently, twenty five thousand users are using Jira. 

We have been using this for the last eight years and we are quite accustomed to that. We don’t need much support from Jira or Atlassian. Yes, but we have got an enterprise version of that, and their support is quite quick.

Positive

I was using HPE Quality Management Tool.

The initial setup of Jira is very easy. I have been an administrator, so I would say that because used to it. But in comparison to other systems, yeah, it’s quite easy and user-friendly. The deployment takes two to three days of time. Forty people are required for the maintenance of the solution.

I implemented it myself as an administrator of Jira.

Compared to the value Jira provides, it’s not that expensive. It has an yearly licensing cost.

Use all the reports which are generated. You have to make a system for the process. Here is a small example during a subtask. The time input via the source is not mandatory. But you have to make it mandatory either from the back end.

You’ll not be able to fetch the reports on the performance, the health of the project, capacity management, or IT management if the data is not input properly. So this is something which people most people don’t take care of as a Jira planning. But when you plan a project, you have to plan these things.

I rate the overall solution a seven out of ten.

I use Jira for the development of different versions of software, upgrading it from one version to another, and developing and collecting specs for the new versions.

I like that Jira keeps track of time and is good for how it organizes.

Jira has a lack of graphical interface that maps the different cases to the space or in the project. For example, if you have a project that has a big diagram of component systems, people, and use cases, each of those Jira cases usually can be mapped to a specific location. This can be enhanced by a curve set of Jira, or a curve set of screens, where you can map on which pieces of the project you were working on at that particular screen. When working on the left side of the diagram, or the right side of the diagram, you should be able to request all those Jira that are related to that part of the project.

If a system has ten different steps of data flow and the components are clear. You should be able to map those Jira cases to different steps in the process. This would show you how a field or component is related to a location in the diagram. The diagram then would show all the cases waiting to be done or already done.

Jira works too slow, especially when you are in a big organization with thousands of users. It is also too slow when integrating with other components like SVN or with a built system. I would like to see everything that Jira does is under have a second response time.

I have been using Jira for about one year.

Jira is a stable solution, other than planned downtime, it has no downtime.

Jira is integrated with other components in our system, like the build and release systems. 

We use internal technical support.

I would recommend that an organization implementing Jira ensure that someone gets training both at the developer level and the project manager level. The developer needs to know what needs to be done, what are the components and why are they there. The project manager should join the training and determine if there is a relation between multiple projects to see that they are really integrated well into other components of continuous integration and continuous delivery.

Because of the slowness, I would rate Jira an eight out of ten.

My primary use case for Jira is agile development as a systems integrator. The best use case is to pile up the backlog and then assign those backlogs stories to the user stories, which will be filtered into a sprint. Each story is then assigned to a cross-functional team member for tracking the dependencies and progress on the user story. You can also tag the user story to a particular team.

The most valuable feature for me has been tagging. Also, there's the option to add task lists to each user story. In addition, user stories can be grouped into one feature, which allows us to visualize our progress. The burndown chart is also helpful when it comes to reporting and allows us to know where we are going, especially during development.

I have used Jira for a total of seven months. 

Jira is a reliable solution. In fact, it is not only used for user stories. It is used as an issue tracker tool as well. So I think it supports multiple use cases, which is good.

Multiple users have logged into it at the same time without running into any issues. At my current organization, some 25 people use it. At my previous organization, about 40 people used it. We have plans to increase usage. 

I have not had to call up their tech support. They have plenty of troubleshooting documentation online. 

The initial setup was a bit problematic in terms of getting access to Jira. That goes for a few users, including me.

It is a good solution and a very popular one, as well. So I would recommend it if you are going for agile methodology. It works for both iterative and incremental development. You should use it. 

This is a solid solution for medium to large companies.

We are using it for project management.

It helps everyone to be on the same page.

Its integration with Bitbucket, Confluence, and other related products that Atlassian owns is most valuable.

If CI/CD is integrated with it, it would be better. I've used Azure DevOps before, and it's nice to have everything, such as CI/CD Repos and other things, integrated. Jira has fewer integrations. Azure DevOps has an easier interface, and it has got everything in one spot. I don't have to jump around in different applications.

It should have more Trello-like features. There are some things you can do in Trello, but you can't do them in Jira, which doesn't make any sense because Jira bought Trello.

It looks pretty solid.

It looks scalable. I haven't seen any issues.

It is being used extensively at the moment in our organization. Currently, IT departments are using it.

I have not interacted with them.

I wasn't around during the setup.

It has a lot going on. They own Bamboo, but right now, we're using Jenkins. 

I have used Azure DevOps at another company. I would advise going for Azure DevOps because it has everything. You've got your DevOps, and you have your Repos. Everything is integrated.

I would rate Jira a six out of 10.

ira is a very complete tool in the tech industry, helping in deploying software. Jira is a very strong tool for a corporation with a team to track and monitor all the tasks that have been defined within a project. It helps teams work and collaborate faster to improve performance. 

I think one of the most powerful features in Jira is the customization of fields and workflow. Jira helps in projects consisting of a workflow by providing templates with the return workflow, we can even modify the workflow and the fields. 

I think the GIS can seem too complex for some people because there are a lot of structures in the software itself. Users need to understand how Jira works, how to define Apex, how to use the storage and many other things. Each template provided by Jira has a different functionality, so users need to explore further about the functions of Jira, especially for the setting and configuration factors. There might be users out there who are unaware of the features in Jira. Otherwise, users will be confused about how to use this tool as it's very complex. 

The product is stable, and in terms of performance, it's really fast. The support team from Jira always informs users in advance, for example, if there is any scheduled maintenance or anything related to the performance tab. I believe Jira also creates maintenance schedules by considering the non-productive hours for each country. Hub fixes and new feature addition time are also planned by Jira for users. 

Jira has a great Knowledge Center, for any kind of questions about how to use the product or other FAQs. Users can check the Knowledge Center before raising a ticket to Jira support. But for some cases, if someone creates a ticket, Jira support is very proactive and follows up on every ticket to provide a solution. Thus, support from Jira is great. I would rate customer support a nine out of ten. 

Positive

Previously before using Jira, we were using Google Workspace because it also has collaborative features. But I think it was missing a lot of features compared to Jira. Jira is specifically created for product or software development, so it's suitable for our business product. Jira has also gone through a lot of improvements over the years since we are using it. 

Not much time is needed to install or configure this tool. You just need to register and subscribe before the tool is ready to use.  

I would rate this product an eight out of ten.