Jira Reviews

Its use case just depends on the company I've been with at the time. I have used it for defect management, development processes, and status. At one point, we ran our entire risk platform out of it as well.

The dynamic communication and the ability to customize it the way we want are the most valuable features.

Its ability to perform true executive-level status reporting could be improved. There are a lot of benefits there, but there are also a lot of things they can and should expand upon.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

I have not interacted with them. I've struggled with getting Atlassian resources, but that could partially be my fault.

It depends on the type of license. In terms of subscription, it is cheap, and it works pretty well.

You need to investigate and understand dynamically what it is that you're looking to do. Don't just dive in and start creating. Before going into it, you should really organize your formatting or direction of the cause. There are other tools that are like cookie-cutters. Jira is so customizable that you really need to define what you're going to do with it.

I would rate it a nine 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.

We use Jira mostly for task coordination and assignment. Additionally, scrum methodologies defined work items and bug issues. If we create any bugs all of them are fixed.

Jira can improve by making methodologies better, such as scrum and agile. Additionally, improvements in Kanban boards are needed.

I have been using Jira for approximately five years.

The stability of Jira is good.

Jira is scalable, this is in part because in our company we use it on the cloud.

We have not needed to use the support from Jira. It is easy to find information on Google or any other search platform. If we encounter an issue we can find the solution online.

The initial setup of Jira was simple.

The standard package of Jira is for 100 users. They should offer more packages for other increments, such as 500 or 2,000. In my previous company, there was a free package that provided a minimal number of users.

I rate Jira 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.

It's scalable.

It's easy to deploy.

The cost of the solution seems to be reasonable. 

Once the solution is deployed, it's not easy to configure. If you have a lot of capability, it's very dynamic from the back end. Therefore, when setting up the workflows, it can be a little bit complex. We did a lot of functions on managing the development and that's why maybe it's a little bit complex. Basically, in order to design a workflow in Jira, it's not a straightforward task.

From a feature perspective, not much is missing. However, they need to put some investment into the user experience. It needs to be easier to use, more friendly, especially on the configuration part. It's a hassle. You need to deal with a high learning curve in order to understand how it's configured and how it can work.

We've used the solution for more than eight years now.

The solution is scalable. 

We have more than 50 people using Jira at this time. 

We do plan to increase usage. We are growing. Since we are growing, we are increasing Jira as each member on the technology team needs an account for development, business analysis, or testing.

While the initial setup is pretty simple and straightforward, handling the configurations and the workflows can be complex. 

I didn't attend this in the development phase. In testing, I did the same effort and it took me a month to set up while I was deploying a test stream. I worked on the testing workflow as well, the defect workflow. That said, I don't know how long it takes for them to configure Jira.

We handled the setup in-house.

The licensing is per unit. My understanding is that it is pretty affordable. However, I don't directly deal with licensing.

We are just a customer and an end-user.

From a testing point of view, I would rate it at a six out of ten. I use it as a defect management tool, and it, for me, it's not easy to use.

Jira is used for issue tracking and defining the development pipeline. It's helpful to define when a project is done and track a task as it moves through different stages. The deployment type varies based on the customer's environment. We sometimes connect to the client's setup, which can be in the cloud or on-premise. 

I like that Jira allows you to customize the flow for an agile process and adapt it to your own flow.

We've used Jira for around 10 years.

We evaluated Jira for security and stability, and everything went well. 

Jira performs well and scales up enough to meet our needs. We probably have about 200 users, so we don't need more than what it offers. 

We used a solution called Mantis a long time ago. We're a software outsourcing company, so we adapt to our clients' setup. Plus, Jira serves our needs well, so it made sense for us to work with that. We don't recommend anything else. We use Azure DevOps, Jira, and Confluence on our projects. If it's not in Microsoft, then it's Jira and Confluence.

Deployment isn't something I handle personally. Our DevOps department does that, or it's installed by the client, so I'm not dealing with it either way. One engineer is enough to deploy.

I don't know the price of all the setups. Our clients pay for the setup, so our Jira users are covered by them. Of course, the price could always be cheaper.

I rate Jira nine out of 10.

I use Jira for user stories, tasks, bugs, track releases, track backlogs issues, burndown, and test reports.

Jira has helped our company because it is easy to track releases and deployments. It is easy to track which tickets have been done or are still pending and left to be completed.

Jira's most valuable features are ease of use, simple to understand, and highly flexible. Additionally, you can use kanban or scrum which is a benefit.

The reports in Jira can be improved, especially for test reports. I find it difficult to customize and integrate for different testing purposes.

The out-of-the-box version of Jira has minimal to no testing functionality. I have to use Zephyr to be able to track testing. The time logging is also not easy to use, or user-friendly.

In the next release of Jira, there should be test cases in the test reports. Better burndown and burnup reports should be enhanced. Additionally, the usability of time logging could be better.

I have been using Jira for seven years.

Jira is stable and reliable, we have not had an issue.

I have found Jira scalable.

We have approximately 50 people using the solution in my organization.

I use the solution extensively in my organization, I use it daily.

I have not contacted support from Jira.

When I came to this company I had already used Jira. Previously, I was using quality control from Quality Center and Azure DevOps.

The initial setup was straightforward overall. The process takes only 10 to 15 minutes. However, the setup could improve.

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

We have two administrators that do the patching and maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend Jira to others.

I would advise others to be sure to do the reports correctly because there can be some challenges in reporting and in the testing phase.

I rate Jira an eight out of ten.

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.