An updated workflow for Server feature suggestions

[BillyP]

Just chiming in to say I support the request/ need for more communication.  I know this is tough and will never be fully satisfied.  

Also want to support the need for balance.   We live and breath this stuff, but we only see from our point of view.  

PS - love the overall discussion here!  This is the kind of movement that will stir the inner Unicorns in us all for something greater! 

[nicolehushka]

I like this workflow and would like to leverage for our group too.  Any chance you'd be willing to share the workflow configuration details so we can recreate?  Or better yet, allow us to import from the marketplace?

[Gosia Kowalska]

@nicolehushka I am glad to hear you like the workflow. It's actually very simple (see the attached screenshot) and there is no additional complexity behind the scenes. Obviously, your team may decide to apply some custom configurations of required fields and validators, dependent on what you want to track. I hope it helps!

[EDV SCKAT]

Its (not) funny seeing successful companies failing on the easiest things. Atlassian is the best example why being small and successful doesn’t mean being big and successful.

atlassian has hugely failed and still does with this stuff.

EVERY inquiry is worth the same. Your PAYING customers take time, so should You!

if You need more humans, get them, if You need an AI ask google for help, but start becoming sane again.

WE the PAYING customers are not responsible for your completely wrong strategy regarding Datacenter and Cloud!

if a PM can’t figure out what the market needs, replace him / almost everyone here could do a roadmap easily without even thinking long.

Take a year for refinement as apple does every other year!

[greg varela]

If you can't keep up with feature requests, maybe you should consider open sourcing your code so other developers can help your company. Or, hire more developers. 

[Seth Silvernail]

Any clarity on how long a request could be in "Gathering Interest" stage or what the threshold is to trigger review to finally move it along in the workflow?

I have an example ticket that is six+ years old now that to this day is still getting up votes and interest comments but is still in the "Gathering Interest" stage. Any clarity your team could provide?

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JSWSERVER-6135

[refalm1]

What bothers me a lot is when a feature gets removed (because one Atlassian employee was like "no one uses that anyway") without consulting users.

Then you have to basically beg the company you pay a lot of money to bring back a critical feature that was in the product when you evaluated it.

Example:

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BSERV-7992

[Damian Wheeler (Otago)]

I agree with Seth Silvernail and other with similar comments. There are a number of examples of long standing issues that new customers also run into. Some are enough of a blocker that it stops people purchasing your product when they strike it during eval. That doesn't seem to convince Atlassian to prioritise it either. Other things can be solved with paid plugins but it is getting to the point where we could be paying more every year for plugins than we do for the Atlassian products at the core. Perhaps Atlassian should consider acquiring some of those and making them a core feature.

[Pujan Ziaie]

Hi,

Over a year ago Atlassian said they are going to revisit some tickets with higher number of votes. For example this one for providing translation option for workflow transitions:

https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRASERVER-6798

Have you automated this reconsideration process? It seems like nothing is happening after over a year.

Cheers

[Ravi Bhargava Gunturu]

These are endless list of comments and replies, but could not get to the fact whether I can exclude invalid / onhold issues from my velocity calculation from the Jira reports. 

If someone has a way to do this in Jira, please let me know.

GRB