Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Jira Sucks

whyjirasucks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 530 posts

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#291

Post by p2t2p »

specialist wrote: post #280
tootie wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% disagree. Fixing a bug or delivering a feature where you haven't documented the process, (how the criteria were decided, when it was tested and deployed) is as good a running a web site nobody visits. JIRA hate comes from the bottom up. Developers don't like having to have their work parceled out so specifically. But it's not for them. It's for managers and stakeholders who have to report progress and who are…

> ...you haven't documented the process... How does JIRA help with that? I'd LOVE an unauthorized documentary revealing how Atlassian dog foods JIRA. My $100 bet: They don't. While Atlassian has great confidence for how you should run your projects, what they do internally bears no resemblance to that sage advice.

> They don't.

Funny. Can I get $100 please?

Every team has their own process that is tailored to their needs, process is decided by devs, not managers, managers only do "I'd like to have this kind of visibility" requests some times and I yet to see those requests introducing any kind of burden, usually very miniscule things.

We have very simple process in our team with two issue types for devs - task and bug. We have two week long sprints and put tasks from backlog into them. Statuses are: open, in progress, code review, done. If I forgot to move a ticket than a team lead or feature lead will do that for me whenever they are at it.

Besides this there are epics but devs don't deal with them, feature leads and team leads and PMs do.

This is all running on an instance that is deployed every 4 hours with changes from master and goes through the same upgrade process our customers would go.

There's special set of very high-level tickets but we don't deal with those, those are for for people 3 levels above.

Sprint planning is about 30 minutes because backlog grooming is done for devs by feature leads and team leads and that's pretty much the only obligatory meeting.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#292

Post by antaviana »

Lazare wrote: post #119

There's a hundred small issues with Jira, but there's one huge one: It's slow. Really, really slow. Atlassian seems to make a lot of money, so I guess they're optimising for something that matters to someone , but from my point of view I have a simple process for evaluating tools: 1) Can I use it at all ? 2) How many of the features I want does it have? I'm pretty sure Jira would score great on the second question, b…

> Atlassian seems to make a lot of money

Atlassian has been losing money in every quarter for quite a few quarters. But its market capitalization has been generally increasing so shareholders who sold their stock probably made money.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#293

Post by specialist »

p2t2p wrote: post #291
specialist wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...you haven't documented the process... How does JIRA help with that? I'd LOVE an unauthorized documentary revealing how Atlassian dog foods JIRA. My $100 bet: They don't. While Atlassian has great confidence for how you should run your projects, what they do internally bears no resemblance to that sage advice.

> They don't. Funny. Can I get $100 please? Every team has their own process that is tailored to their needs, process is decided by devs, not managers, managers only do "I'd like to have this kind of visibility" requests some times and I yet to see those requests introducing any kind of burden, usually very miniscule things. We have very simple process in our team with two issue types for devs - task and bug. We have…

Sure. Post the video(s) and a Venmo account.

> Sprint planning is about 30 minutes...

That's like saying Santa Klaus is real.

I want to believe you. I really do.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#294

Post by tpmx »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #84

To me, what sucks about JIRA (and would suck about any well-designed tool that replaces it) is not "feature x" but the entire JIRA mentality. All of it. It encourages micro-management. It encourages more and more process. It is the enemy of getting better at the DORA metrics, which requires streamlining process. tickets in JIRA are not the work itself, never was and never will be, it is a LARP of the work, but it get…

We used to call that anti-pattern "playing Jira Tetris" at a previous workplace. It's excellent at the creating the illusion of productivity. Some people really fall into the trap deep.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#295

Post by Kwpolska »

xxpor wrote: post #241
marcc wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the comment was implying that a manager has to eyeball the ticket to make it worthwhile. The comment said there's value in documenting the process, and I agree with that. We use a ticketing system to track work. It's not Jira. But we do have a requirement that all work is tracked in that system. It's not so that a Product Manager or Engineering Manager can chime in and micromanage; it's so that we have…

the problem is it takes me 2 seconds to run git log to see if a bug has been fixed, vs going to a web browser, waiting for JIRA to load, waiting for a search to finish, curse at search for being useless, eventually find the ticket, and then see if it's complete.

Let’s face it, most git logs have one-liner commit messages that may or may not describe the issue at a very high level. Even if you have long commit messages, they still are less likely to contain extended discussions about the issue (which can be useful many months later), and cannot be edited. In many places, commits are expected to have the Jira/bugtracker ticket number in the commit message, so that if I find the bugfix via a git log (or git blame), I can quickly find the ticket with the extended discussion and other details that might be important.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#296

Post by [deleted] »

SideburnsOfDoom wrote: post #84

To me, what sucks about JIRA (and would suck about any well-designed tool that replaces it) is not "feature x" but the entire JIRA mentality. All of it. It encourages micro-management. It encourages more and more process. It is the enemy of getting better at the DORA metrics, which requires streamlining process. tickets in JIRA are not the work itself, never was and never will be, it is a LARP of the work, but it get…

[deleted]

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#297

Post by my_usernam3 »

ori_b wrote: post #267
kiksy wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice. This would likely solve a huge chunk of push back against JIRA.

Yes, I'd also enjoy jira if the company would pay someone else to use it for me.

Oh man I think I need a new pair of underpants just thinking about that!

That being said, my current manager is super awesome about minimizing our JIRA involvement so I really shouldn't be complaining atm.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#298

Post by losthobbies »

I remember when I was working in a start up we used a simple Excel spreadsheet to track bugs. We eventually transitioned to Jira and it was good. I now work in a much bigger company and we use an Excel spreadsheet to track the Jira bugs. It’s very annoying.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#299

Post by p2t2p »

specialist wrote: post #280
tootie wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I 100% disagree. Fixing a bug or delivering a feature where you haven't documented the process, (how the criteria were decided, when it was tested and deployed) is as good a running a web site nobody visits. JIRA hate comes from the bottom up. Developers don't like having to have their work parceled out so specifically. But it's not for them. It's for managers and stakeholders who have to report progress and who are…

> ...you haven't documented the process... How does JIRA help with that? I'd LOVE an unauthorized documentary revealing how Atlassian dog foods JIRA. My $100 bet: They don't. While Atlassian has great confidence for how you should run your projects, what they do internally bears no resemblance to that sage advice.

Atlassian whole point is team centricity. The team decides the process, the team decides the metrics, the team decides what to deliver and how fast. The team decides what are the QA rituals. Yes, there checks to fix a disfunctional team but I have never seen those applied. So there are as many processes as teams in Atlassian.

Re: Why Jira Sucks

#300

Post by SoylentYellow »

kwertyoowiyop wrote: post #139
Lazare wrote: post #119

There's a hundred small issues with Jira, but there's one huge one: It's slow. Really, really slow. Atlassian seems to make a lot of money, so I guess they're optimising for something that matters to someone , but from my point of view I have a simple process for evaluating tools: 1) Can I use it at all ? 2) How many of the features I want does it have? I'm pretty sure Jira would score great on the second question, b…

It has that slowness that makes my soul die a little every time I bring up a page, every time I click on a link, every time I make an edit, every time I... What’s the opposite of “delightful”?

excruciating
Post reply on HN