You're on your way to the next level! Join the Kudos program to earn points and save your progress.
Level 1: Seed
25 / 150 points
1 badge earned
Challenges come and go, but your rewards stay with you. Do more to earn more!
What goes around comes around! Share the love by gifting kudos to your peers.
Keep earning points to reach the top of the leaderboard. It resets every quarter so you always have a chance!
Join now to unlock these features and more
I have a business group who wants to use a non standard issue type in the plan, called Feature. What are the cons in using an issue type that is not standard? Limitations? If I add it to the project configuration, will it be as useful and beneficial as a e.g. a story (a standard issue type)? Any help on this will be appreciated!
There's no limitations or cons for having another issue type in a project. The pros are usually quite simple - you can see at a glance what it is likely to contain without reading the detail. If you create feature at the standard issue level (not a sub-task type), it will work the same as any other type at that level (assuming it is set to use all the same schemes)
No, the Epic issue type is a special case, a system thing and there's a lot of code in Jira that assumes there is only one type of issue to be used as an epic (also, do not rename Epic - Jira Software works ok if you do, but some apps break in very interesting ways. This is likely to go away as part of the closer integration with Jira Align, but for now, don't rename it)
Hey @Nic Brough -Adaptavist- , I wanted to follow up on this one. What about creating a hierarchical level in between Epic and Story. In SAFe, they have other "levels" such as Capability and Feature. Is it possible to create a new Advanced Roadmaps/Portfolio hierarchy level above Story?
So, I'm going to avoid the main question there.
SAFe defines Epic as being at a different level to Jira's Epic. Epics in SAFe are higher up.
Jira does not (yet) really allow you to rename Epics (you can, technically, but it breaks some stuff. This is changing soon). To match SAFe, you want to rename them as Features.
But. Yes, you are right, Portfolio/Advanced Roadmaps do indeed add layers. But not about story, they add them above Epics.
I have a Jira project which exclusively contains issues of a custom type, "Feature Release", which is of standard issue type (i.e., not sub-task level).
When I add this Jira project as an issue source to advanced roadmaps, I see zero issues.
According to documentation, all standard issue types should be shown.
What am I doing wrong?
Ok, that won't work.
The SAFe hierarchy lowest 4 levels and Jira's 3 layer scheme have a bit of a conflict.
|Story||Issue (but you can have many types, called whatever you like. They're all perfectly SAFe stories)|
|Sub-tasks||Sub-tasks (again, many names)|
Epics in Jira are a special case. If you don't use them, you can't actually map anything useful in SAFe to Jira, because there's nothing in Jira that can act at the Feature level other than Epics.
Until recently, we were stuck with that, because it was not safe to rename Epics, but if you get "Advanced Roadmaps", it is now fixable.
With AR, you can define layers above Jira's Epic, so you could add your "Portfolio Epic" now.
But it also lets you do some stuff with alternate names. If you have AR, I strongly recommend renaming "Epic" to "Feature" (as it no longer breaks anything), and then adding Epic as the layer above. You then have a good, simple, and clear SAFe mapping.
May I suggest you do that, and then have another look at your roadmap?
Same answer - add them in AR (Or use Align and add them in there)