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
Have stumbled on a dilemma on how its the best way to go forward for an affiliation project.
First steps were to do a JWM project but the user needs 200 issues/cards on the board per campaign and after noticing the 3000 limit on JWM board I decided to go with JS with a Kanban board.
The issue here is I want to simplify things as much as possible and i don't like the 200 card/issue on board per campaign. Do you guys have an idea in what's the best way forward?
Hi @Aaron Micallef , welcome to the Atlassian Community and thanks for your question!
When you say they need 200 cards, please can you explain a little bit why so many, what the purpose is?
You could create a list of issues in any project type and then just show them on a dashboard, where it would be easier to understand the overall progress, using the dashboard gadgets.
Please can you give us some more feedback about what you are trying to achieve?
Hello @Valerie Knapp ,
Thanks for your reply.
Basically every campaign has its task and they have multiple of them sometime might be 50 sometime might be 200. They want the flexibility to have a card on each task so that they can track their progress and furthermore extract all the details with that task so that they can upload it to tableau.
What I was thinking is to the have an EPIC and create the child issue (custom one) so that all task would be bunched in the epic to avoid clutter but than again they would like to have as many details as possible visible on the card for certain custom fields.
They want to work on board view rather than on a list view.
Hi @Aaron Micallef , thanks for your reply. Ok, I am thinking you could even still use JWM. If you create a structure like you suggested, you can have a different workflow for the Epic and sub-Epic issue types. In this way, you can toggle between two boards -
It is also possible to have either in JSW or in JWM filtering for the assignee, either, in this ^ case with the Filter or to set quick filters in JSW.
You could also use automation, if you wanted / needed to, on the creation of the Epic to make the rest of the structure for the other tasks. It depends on how consistent the structure is and also how many automation executions you have.
I would encourage you to make some test prototypes and see which you prefer. If you have more questions, we are here.