Jira Reviews

We are using Jira for ticket management.

The solution has helped my companies efficiency with managing tickets throughout the life cycle.

We have gone through several version changes and some of those changes have not been intuitive. There was a learning curve and we had some complaints internally about the changes, such as the new interface.

The solution could improve the Agile reports. They do have quite a bit of reports already, but additional reports would be a benefit.

I have used Jira within the past 12 months.

Jira is stable.

I have found Jira to be scalable.

We have a few hundreds using Jira in my organization. They consist of developers, project managers, and testers.

Whether we increase usage of the solution depends on what each team wants to do. There is some level of common solution approach, but I don't know for sure whether this is the direction that everybody is wanting to adopt.

We had to reach out to their support a few times. The support was good, I did not have any issues with them.

The initial setup was not difficult.

We have an IT team that supports the solution.

My advice to others wanting to implement this solution is to utilize the SaaS solution unless it is required not to. Having your own instance running in your data center or private cloud requires your own staff and resources to maintain and upkeep. It can be quite time-consuming work. Unless you are invested in something like that, there is a benefit of just using a SaaS solution.

I rate Jira a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for all issue reporting. The business uses it and we use it in IT as well. Any issue, anything from the help desk to software issues use Jira. It can house test plans, test sets, test executions, and provide some reporting. It's the reporting that's important for us.

The product has formalized the workflow process for reporting tracking and stacking and processing issues. It's also added some formal approvals, just for the purpose of formalization of a process workflow.

If you're using it in an agile shop, the traceability between epic story's test case defects is very helpful. 

I like that all of the team members on an agile team can use it. No one is in a separate application.

The stability is good.

The product can scale, so long as you have storage.

The reporting needs to be better. Being able to do some test management would be useful. In the tool, it would be ideal if they could give you some out-of-the-box reports for things like requirement coverage and regression and things of that nature.

I've used the solution off and on for about four years. I used it when it first came out to do some evaluation and we implemented it at a startup. That was when it first started. I've probably only really used it for about eight months on a daily basis.

We have had no downtime, and therefore I don't have anything to say that would be negative. It seems to be quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.

As long as a company has the money for storage, it's scalable to any size. A small company can use it or an enterprise-level company can use it. It works for both.

Currently, we have less than 1,000 users in our organization using the solution.

Jira is extensively used in our organization.

We do plan to increase usage as well. The company purchased it so that it would be scalable. There's not a solid plan right now to add measurable users or increase the size, however, we know that it's available and that's what we were looking for - something that is scalable. The plans are to grow and as that growth happens, either organically, or via the purchase of other financial entities, we can grow the size of the database application and the number of the users.

I did not personally use technical support. I have worked several months with the people who have, and they say that the support is very good.

If the company used something previous to Jira, it was before my time. It possibly could have been Sharepoint, however, I was not with the company at that time.

The solution was implemented before I came to the company.

That said, my understanding is that the company tried to use as much out-of-the-box functionality as possible and it was quite an effort. They spent quite a lot of time formalizing workflows and things of that nature. In the end, it was very well thought out.

We do have a team for maintenance and what takes the most time with any upgrade is going through the changes, the enhancements, the defect fixes, and things like that. The actual time that it takes to physically update it is pretty minimal. However, going through the documentation and meeting with the team to make sure that we have testing covered prior to upgrading is work. We have a test environment prior to pushing it to production. That's what really takes time. It's not the physical update. An update might take two and a half hours and there's a lot of data in there.

My understanding is the company used professional services from Jira and also got some training and stuff of that nature.

We're just customers and end-users.

We just upgraded the solution. We are on the latest version.

I'd advise potential users to make sure that they talk to the people who are going to be testing and make sure that they know, what metrics they need before they pick a tool, any tool - even if it isn't Jira.

I'd rate the solution at an eight 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.

Currently, we're using it as a tracking tool. It helps our development department operate more efficiently while enabling the business side of the company to understand and track things better. For example, if we get a requirement from the business side, they don't tell us the status of the current cover every time. So basically what we do, if we complete development or make it to the development phase, then we can change the status in Jira. If the other departments want to see the progress, they can go to the Jira dashboard. So this reduces the amount of necessary communication between the business side and developers. Developers can mainly focus on the development instead of having to answer questions from other departments.

When we get a sign-off for a management request, we must catch it in our email inbox. Now we can get the sign-off through Jira, and I've automated this. For example, we can get the Jenkins pipeline results for every build we create and have that result plugged into Jira. So when we run the Jenkins pipeline, the build is already automatically connected to Jira. We've been able to integrate the ecosystem we created using this automation tool. If you open Jira, you get the development tab there, so you can find out everything a company made under this Jira or what brand is created under this Jira. As a developer, I find this feature valuable.

Jira could be simplified and integrated more with standard corporate communications tools. Say, for example, we have one indication of Jira in Confluence. So if we type a Jira ID into Confluence, it gives us all the information about the Jira profile. I would like to see this feature integrated with email platforms so we can just put our Jira ID or Jira link into an email and get all the details automatically. This kind of integration and automation would be helpful. 

I'd like to see better note-taking capabilities so every user can get notes when someone provides comments on a Jira ticket. So if they don't want to provide the comments on the Jira ticket, they can get the personal notes in a Jira tool for every profile. It's not something for the business side, but developers can track what work is finished and what still needs to be done. Jira could integrate better with Jenkins, which isn't fully supported on the Jira dashboard yet. I think it would be good to monitor the build's progress directly. That way, we don't have to attach it. We can do it from the background. Some workflow customization would also be good.

In the initial phase, I was using Jira for development and testing purposes. A story was assigned to me, and I just changed the standards and everything. But in the past six months, I have worked with configurations, adding different workflows, and all the other features.

Jira is pretty stable most of the time. However, we have an intranet on our side, and sometimes there are too many users. My company currently has four different departments at the top level. Each of the four departments has fewer than nine Jira users. My current department has approximately seven or eight users. So there are times when Jira goes down, and we find it difficult to log in. But we are trying to increase the capability of servers. Other than that, it's working fine.

We have migrated to GCP, and we're using the internal cloud servers, so we can easily integrate Jira into a server if we want. Scalability is a matter of cost. We just need to present our management with a valid reason for increasing capacity, and if they approve, it's an easy process for us.

We had to call Jira support for help with integration. For example, when I was trying to integrate Jira with my GitHub bot, I had to provide a specific kind of access and then run some scripts to find out if I had enough available space. After that, it's a smooth process.

The Jira setup is a bit complicated because we're deploying it in our internal servers. So we have to manage a lot of things ourselves. For example, when the new version of Jira comes in, we have to patch our servers and update our certificates. And then, for deployment, we have pipelines that we need to trigger. That's not too hard, but the patching and upgrading can be complex.

If it's a smooth deployment, it just takes 30 minutes because we only have to replicate it on a different server. So currently, we have more than 20 servers. So every time we deploy, we create a replica on every server, which takes time because we have to verify that it's working. In total, it's about two hours of downtime in Jira, so we do this at night. 

Currently, more than 10 people are involved with maintenance. For my team, I do the deployment and configurations. But if there is some fundamental change or a serious bug, a separate team handles this.

I don't deal with the money side of things. I just specify the requirements and the company handles everything. We are using it for many tasks so it seems like the price is reasonable. 

I rate JIRA eight out of 10. I think it's a great tool. I have been working with this tool for the past two years and I use it every day.

I'm from a QA background and we used to do automation. It was far easier to link JIRA with our QA automation frameworks because JIRA has a lot of public APIs that we could use. Also, the burndown charts and the ability to manage different frameworks of the adjoint model are helpful. We could use scrum in one project or Kanban. So it was easy to manage the transition from one framework to another. Those are the things I found useful, but I haven't seen the case of TFS yet.

JIRA could simplify the query mechanism. Running a query for tasks, stories, and so on is far easier in TFS. The algorithm is easier. In JIRA, it's a bit complex in terms of what advanced search queries we use. Sharing them is also a problem. Because TFS is on the cloud, we can easily save that query and share it with our team members. So that is one area where JIRA has some room for improvement.

JIRA is pretty much stable.

JIRA is far more scalable in terms of using different frameworks, burndown charts, dashboards, etc. The size of your company doesn't matter. JIRA has the capability to work for smaller organizations and larger ones as well.

JIRA's technical support is absolutely fantabulous. I had used it in the past when I was working at my previous organization. And when we wanted to link it with a framework, they helped us out with the API we were looking for. There were certain areas where we were looking for a specific API. And also they have a lot of options in terms of packages that you can choose according to your company's needs. They had custom packages available. You do not have to buy a larger package. They have smaller packages for smaller organizations. So that's something exciting.

JIRA is fairly easy to set up. That is not a problem.

JIRA's pricing is very economical. I would say that JIRA is a great deal more economical than Microsoft. So pricing-wise, JIRA is also good.

I would rate JIRA nine out of 10. From a technical background, it depends on what you would like to use — which stack you want to go for. In other words, it depends upon the kind of infrastructure you have right now. For example, say you are developing software on Microsoft's .Net framework, then you are obviously already using Visual Studio and Microsoft Stack. In that case, it's a lot easier to integrate with TFS. But if you are using open-source solutions, like a Java platform, you can go for JIRA. So it totally depends upon the technical capability, or technical infrastructure one has.

We use Jira to create releases, tasks, sprints, and collaborate within teams. The solution can be deployed on both the cloud or on-premise.

Jira has a useful user interface and overall is easy to understand and learn.

Performance is something that can always be improved upon in a feature release. Additionally, it would be a benefit to add Markdown in Jira because sometimes it might be better to describe everything in Markdown because it is a common language structure.

I have been using Jira for approximately eight years.

Jira's stability could improve. We have experienced times when we were out of memory which is possible due to a memory leak. It is hard to pinpoint the cause, it could be the operating system.

I have had to contact the support when I had some questions about the upgrading process and they answered in a timely manner.

I have previously used a comparable solution to Jira and the largest benefit was it was free.

The setup is not difficult. I have done it a few times in Kubernetes and did upgrades, the experience was straightforward.

There are other solutions that are free making this solution seem expensive in comparison.

I have found the cloud deployment better than the on-premise. However, for those wanting to implement this solution, I would advise them to compare the pros and cons of each before making their selection.

I rate Jira a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case of Jira is for tracking corporates and for new test cases where we need to execute monthly releases. We use it for test management purposes, whether for tracking or test use cases in their different cycles. We log everything on Jira and are very dependent on it. We are customers of Jira and I'm senior quality assurance person.

We've seen a benefit from the tracking of the release sizes and their status, it's very clear and simple, and the UI for Jira is easy to understand. 

Jira has a good dashboard. If I'm running an automated test script on different levels, say API automated or UI automated, and want to track automation status in the dashboard, I can get the overall status. I know how many cases are automated with the API or the UI and how many cannot be automated. It's a good feature. 

Jira could be more user friendly. When I started using it, I faced difficulties in different project selections and there were issues with bugs. It was not straightforward. I feel it could offer an improved user experience. I have a small issue that whenever I log out there's a bug and for a fraction of a second, I'll get a notification that then disappears before I can do anything about it. 

I've been using Jira for quite some time. 

From a performance perspective, I have faced many issues, some bugs and glitches, and there has been some down time. In general, it's a stable solution. 

The solution is scalable; we have BA, QA and Dev Ops people all using Jira. Everyone has  access, but certain users have access to certain areas. It's our test management tool so we use it a lot, everything is tracked on Jira and our reports come from there. 

We haven't used the technical support.

I used TFS before Jira. They are similar tools but I found TFS to be a more complicated solution.

The deployment took a few hours, some aspects were more complicated than others. 

I'm not involved in the licensing aspect. 

I rate Jira seven out of 10. 

We have different software projects. I primarily use Jira to define and plan projects for agile-based project management. We use different aspects. We have scrum-based management for some projects and different systems for others.

The agile framework works well, and I pretty much live by that. Everything, such as sprint management, is laid out.

It is easy to use and implement. It provides me with pretty much everything that I need to be able to do day-to-day planning, task management, and work log efficacy.

It is a great centralized tool for everything. You can use it for your local team management to communicate with your developers. You can also use it for your management team and for communicating with subcontractors to keep track of work products, work logs, and perform at the minute status.

For how I identify tasks and break down use cases, I wish there was the ability to drill down Stories multiple levels deep. You have Epics, Stories, Tasks and Sub-tasks. Each of which can go one level deep. It would be nice to be able to be able to define Stories multiple levels deep in order to break down super complex use-cases. That is my only pet peeve. Other than that, they've been improving year to year, and each new version seems to have increased levels of improvement.

I use another product that synchronizes well with Jira called Worklog Assistant, by Sohail Somani, which runs separately to Jira. It is a great product that allows you easily keep track of work performed and generate all respective Jira worklogs at the press of a button. I've been using it for years, and it just makes it very easy for me to keep track of what I am doing with an accurate time tracking mechanism. I think this would be a nice tool to integrated with Atlassian Jira.

I've been using it since 2008.

It is pretty stable. They've improved things over the years. Back in 2008, when we were starting to use it, different issues used to come up from time to time. It was still relatively stable. Now, I rarely run into a problem for which I can say that it is a problem with the tool, as opposed to user error.

It is pretty scalable. I was actually kind of surprised at how much data I can put in. It doesn't slow the tool down. It is quite scalable, and it worked well for the projects that we've done.

We're a small company. I can't compare myself to IBM or Raytheon. I can talk for a small company with up to 45 employees with X number of projects. Because of COVID, we've had to pare down, and currently, we have two users who are using it. I myself use it on a regular basis. Four or five years ago, we had subcontractors who used it with us. At that time, we had seven or eight users, including clients and subcontractors.

It is being extensively used at the moment. The only increase in usage would be to include other individuals on it.

We used their support early on, and they were helpful. At that time, we were using the enterprise product, which was a purchased product. So, as a paying customer, you got straight-up support. They were good. There were some bugs and issues early on that were difficult to get through, but they worked them out. Now, we have fewer people, so we use the one to 10 person option, and I haven't had any reason to call support. I haven't had a need to use their support in years.

They self-use their product for defect management. You can always go to their website and find what's going on. They have forums, et cetera.

In the previous company that I've worked for, I've used Bugzilla for defect management. Task management was in-house, but I don't remember the tool that we used to do task management. For building up sprints, etc, we used a Wiki-based system. It probably was TWiki at the time. We had set up our own Wiki-based environments for doing management, et cetera. We also had Excel spreadsheets. I didn't know about Jira back then in the previous company.

We did some research when I started with this company, and we chose to use Atlassian. It wasn't just, "Oh, the company was using it." It was one of the things that I was part of instituting. We did what we call Decision Analysis and Resolution (DAR) to determine what was the best bang for the buck and what covered our needs, and then it evolved from there. After I started using Jira in this company, a lot of things were easy to do.

Its setup is semi intuitive. There are certain things for which you need to look at the instructions. It also depends on how complex your environment settings are.

Initially, back in 2008, it was a little bit more difficult, but they've improved the installation process. If you have a very basic setup, you can just pretty much install it right out of the box with maybe one or two changes. There're certain things for which you need to have some IT knowledge of your environment in order to be able to set it up. Other than that, they have really automated it pretty well. Jira is one of their keystone products.

Its initial deployment took hours or maybe days because there were things that I needed to understand, but they've improved it a great deal. You can pretty much be up and running within an hour, but it also depends on your environment.

Its implementation was an in-house job.

In terms of maintenance, I take care of its maintenance. Its maintenance is minimum, and only one person is required. You can easily run backups. We use Microsoft SQL Server for backend data management, and we automate the backups. We do daily backups, etc. If anything goes wrong with the tool we have, we can just rebuild it from scratch, and we will be fine because our data is there.

They also have built-in backup utilities that you can use. There is an XML-based one, which I do like to use from time to time just as an alternate. So, you do have different options.

We've seen a return on investment when it comes to Jira.

For very small companies, if you have less than 10 individuals, it is $10 a year for each of the products. When we were a part of the enterprise and had more than 10 people using it, or before they came up with this solution for small companies, it was $2,500 a year for the license for Jira and Confluence, and I believe something like $600 a year to perpetuate the license. I can't remember if it was $600 or $2,500 annually. It was for up to 25 people at the time, and this was in the early 2000s and mid 2000s.

There are a number of add-on products that you can sync with Atlassian Jira. Confluence, FishEye, Crucible, and Bamboo are different Atlassian products, but then there are sub-products. They have what's called Atlassian marketplace, and you can buy products for certain needs. Tempo is a perfect product for doing time management and timesheets. It was also $10. So, you have a bunch of different types of add-on products that different individuals have built that work well with the tool, and they are quite stable.

One piece of advice, which they also give in their documentation, is to use your own database management system. They give you something that you can use. It is called HSQL or something like that, but you can use what your company can afford, such as MySQL or SQL Server, and manage that yourself. It will help you to do better data management and backup management. I would use the built-in backup management system as a backup, although I haven't had any problems at all in years. Just for a warm fuzzy, it is always good to have a backup system.

I would recommend looking into primary tools depending on your needs. If you're doing software, FishEye and Crucible are great products to utilize with it. You also have Confluence and Bamboo for continuous build management. Tempo, of course, is good for certain types of management.

I would rate Jira a nine out of 10.