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
In majority of our Jira projects our development and QA teams track various bug types in our Jira - issue types are Functional Bug, Localization Bug and Documentation Bug. Loc and Doc bugs are separated mainly because of they are resolved by independent Localization and Documentation teams (regardless which project these bug types are located in).
Btw, all bug issue types have same workflow and more or less same screens and fields. The main goal to distinguish them is just fast visual bug type recognition and assigning them to the right teams to fix.
In other (simplified) projects, teams are satisfied with simple Bug issue type only. These projects are not product related and therefore no localization or official documentation is needed.
There's been recent request to extend the bug type portfolio - Performance Bug and Security Bug (and hopefully not too many other bug types in future). Again, same WFs and almost the same fields/screens.
There are two approaches in my mind:
With existing Jira instance (with 90k+ of various bug issues) changing the whole concept would be more complicated - updating all JQLs in filters, boards, Jira macros in Confluence pages etc. However, I have several internal tools already prepared that would help to automate all these tasks, so this is not a blocker.
I've very interested how other development/QA teams handle various bug types in their environments.
Thanks for your comments and thoughts.