Jira Reviews

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. 

What I like most about Jira is that it's flexible. It has the flexibility to be configured for any company.

An area for improvement in Jira is that it's not designed for test management. To use it for test management, you need an add-on or several add-ons, e.g. the most popular is Xray, or you can add Zephyr.

An additional feature I'd like to see included in the next release of the solution is the check in and check out feature for the test assets.

My team and I are currently dealing with Jira.

Jira is a stable solution.

I find Jira scalable.

The solution is very reliable, so support is not contacted often, but they are responsive.

Deployment of Jira can be completed within a few days. The number of people you use for its deployment still depends on the company size, but on average, you can use from one to two people for deployment, per week.

I was able to evaluate Micro Focus ALM.

I'm at a professional service company, and I'm the manager, so I don't work with any solution, e.g. my team works with the solutions. My team works with Jira plus Xray, then Azure DevOps, and Micro Focus ALM.

Micro Focus ALM is a very powerful solution, because you can link from the requirements to the test plan and the test lab. In the test lab, you can aggregate the test cases that you want to execute, including defect management. You can incorporate all these into a release, and inside this release, you can have several execution cycles. I'm referring to the functions of all the assets, e.g. functional testing. Jira doesn't have versioning, compared to Micro Focus ALM, so you can have different and fresh versions of the same asset. You can do that using different names, but Jira is not as well-designed as ALM.

I'm rating Jira an eight out of ten.

We're using JIRA in combination with Xray as a test management tool.

The Xray module gives us test management capabilities, right. Where we can store tests and test executions and so on. That's basically where we moved our test out and we left Quality Center behind. 

With Jira, basically, you have a story. You try to estimate the story and then you have to try to have coverage for each story with test cases. We sometimes use it for our automation perspective. We're using the JIRA Xray API to write bad test results into the tool, through an API call rather than going through the UI. Our continuous testing pipeline in GitLab will automatically update the test results through the Xray API. That's it.

The thing that was helpful, in my opinion, was the reporting. I was able to do real-time reports myself without having to wait for data import. 

The product has lots of dashboards that could be created also in Confluence using Jira features. I really like that. I am able to make it transparent to everyone where we're standing in regards to, for example, test automation or test coverage. We could easily integrate Confluence with Jira, produce some handmade dashboards, or use the dashboarding inside Jira itself with the various reporting options there. 

It's totally sufficient to cover our use cases right now. I have no gap at the moment.

There is always a bit of a performance problem. It's a bit slow to load the whole data. When I load those dashboards onto Confluence, it always takes quite a bit of time to get all the data in Confluence. It's a lot of queries.

The only thing that was bothering me was the performance issues where it was very slow. 

We started using the solution three years ago. I've used the solution since 2016 personally. 

Stability has improved over time. It was crashing quite a bit and the minute it crashes, the organization kind of stands still. It's a huge dependence we have on it. However, it was 99% available in the end. Only some kind of maintenance announcements might affect it. Other than that, it was quite stable.

Likely every single user has Jira as we are fully delivering software with that. It's between three and 5,000 users. It's company-wide and there could be thousands of users. All the development work is documented there. It's used for our agile teams. You have teams that are using agile scrum.

It's very flexible and it supports both ways of working. It's very helpful also with child transformation. The whole organization moves into agile and everybody is relying on those dashboards and daily standups and it has heavy adoption. Everybody's using it.

The solution is easy to scale and that's a bit of a problem. It's highly customizable and you can also destroy Jira by over-customizing things. If you, for example, want to raise a bug and you have 50 mandatory fields, you kind of lose patience with it.

That's not really a Jira problem. That's the customization from inside the bank where there are lots of different requirements being put into the tool and it can destroy the user experience in the end if they over-design it. If it takes you ten minutes to raise a bug due to the mandatory fields. That's really annoying and that's a big problem.

Internally, I've used technical support. I have not had contact with Jira externally.

We have a separate team in the company who is dealing with all the support tickets.

There are three levels of support tickets and they probably have connections directly to Jira people or Xray people.

We're looking into transitioning into possible options in GitLab only. GitLab test management would be a topic. However, there we are not clear about the features yet.

We came from Quality Center, the fat client version, and we moved to JIRA Xray three years ago. Now we're making a decision as to whether we want to move away from JIRA Xray to something else. That's the open question right now.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup of the whole thing. I was just a consumer. We were just migrating our data over from QC into Jira Xray and that migration process was okay. 

We lost some data, however, in general, the assets were transferred over and we could continue there and leave the whole old world behind and start working on the new world. 

From a migration perspective, it was almost seamless. Afterward, you just had to learn a little bit. That said, it's quite straightforward. The JQL query language was something new at the beginning yet easy to pick up without big pieces of training. You can train yourself pretty well with the documentation that's available on the internet. I was able to teach myself almost everything without having to go into any training. 

I can't speak to the maintenance requirements involved. That's handled by another team entirely.

I don't have any details in relation to costs or licensing arrangements. 

We have an on-prem installation of Jira. I cannot tell you the version of it. I don't actually care, as long as I can store my stories. They're moving into a soft solution, potentially next year, with it.

I am very happy with the tool. I would recommend others to use Jira anytime, as it's super flexible and there's a lot of things that are not being leveraged at all. There's so much power in the product - we don't even know half of it, I would say, in the organization. 

I'd advise new users to not over-customize it. If you just get it out of the box, you already have a really good evolution and you tend to break it by over-customizing it.

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

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 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.

We use JIRA for software development projects and the implementation of business workflows. Our company runs more than one hundred projects on a single instance server. Besides core IT projects, we have implemented business processes on dedicated JIRA instances to manage high volume (greater than five thousand issues per month) non-conformities for some business lines. 

Transparency of development projects, as well as approval processes for some business projects, has improved massively. Interaction of business units and IT happens very often via JIRA and considered to be very helpful. As many of our developments are requiring some level of compliance, the workflow and documentation of approvals are very handy. 

There is a very flexible configuration of "issues" and related life cycle. On top of it, the number of "add-ons" is overwhelming and of very good quality. I would consider the reporting capabilities to be the best feature, as ultimately the visibility of issues allows management of the projects.

My main concern is the administration of projects, especially user groups, and this requires root access rights but there is no concept of layered admin rights. Projects can be managed by a limited admin, but the creation of projects needs root admin rights. In decentralized project ownership, this gets tedious.

We used an open-source system called Mantis, which was considered unsuitable for use outside the IT world.

The setup of JIRA is straightforward.

To try this solution, use their cloud offering to get familiar. After that, it's in my view worth the money.

We went right away to JIRA without evaluating other options.

JIRA, its add-ons, and the Atlassian product world are already very powerful and it is difficult to name significant blank spaces.

This is a very powerful solution. Get some advice and training to make the most out of it. You may miss out on some of the capabilities if you don't.

We use Jira as a communication tool for tasks and epics. Everything is in one place in the ticket, and it's helpful to communicate with the team. We don't have to use Slack and other platforms to track information related to tasks.

The most useful features are the Kanban dashboard, the ability to create tasks, bugs, epics with child issues, time estimation, and Jira reports. The dashboard helps in tracking tasks and projects easily. Time estimation is crucial for my team to estimate tasks accurately, and the monthly reports are helpful for monitoring progress. We can see everything in one place, which improves communication within the team.

Sometimes it's hard to set up the dashboard for the team lead. For example, I can see tasks selected for development but not UAT tasks. It would be beneficial if the setup was easier. I understand Jira is a comprehensive tool, but dashboard setup could be made more user-friendly.

We've been using this solution for about two years already.

The stability of Jira is good. I have faced issues only once. I would rate it nine out of ten.

Jira is pretty stable and scalable. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it nine for scalability.

I haven't contacted customer support yet.

Positive

My company also uses Azure DevOps dashboard. I prefer Jira because its interface is simpler and easier to use than Azure.

I am just a user of Jira. The dashboard setup is done by our team lead, so I'm not sure how to set up Jira.

The price is regular for this kind of tool. However, my company hasn't bought Confluence integration because of the price. We are fine with Jira, but would like to have integrations if it becomes cheaper.

Feel free to try it, and you will love it. The biggest advantage is that you can see all of the project in one place on the dashboard, track your estimation and time, and see your progress. I rate Jira nine out of ten.