Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Sign up Log in

Earn badges and make progress

You're on your way to the next level! Join the Kudos program to earn points and save your progress.

Deleted user Avatar
Deleted user

Level 1: Seed

25 / 150 points

Next: Root


1 badge earned


Participate in fun challenges

Challenges come and go, but your rewards stay with you. Do more to earn more!


Gift kudos to your peers

What goes around comes around! Share the love by gifting kudos to your peers.


Rise up in the ranks

Keep earning points to reach the top of the leaderboard. It resets every quarter so you always have a chance!


Come for the products,
stay for the community

The Atlassian Community can help you and your team get more value out of Atlassian products and practices.

Atlassian Community about banner
Community Members
Community Events
Community Groups

Shouldn't Atlas Projects be Similar to Jira Projects?

Is it just me or does anyone else get confused about the Atlas Projects? In my mind, I'd think Atlas Projects to align to Jira Projects instead of Jira Epics. We have cross functional teams working on a Jira Project, so having one Jira Project tied to one Atlas Project makes sense. 

But Atlassian seems to feel that an Atlas Project should be connected to a Jira Epic. (

I'm curious what others think and learn what I am missing.

1 comment

This does make some sense.  

I completely understand why people would start with Atlas Project = Jira Project, and I don't think it's a bad approach in some cases.

But that's not how most Jira users work.  I think this is down to the names of the different objects. 

In Atlas, a project is what you expect from the word in the conventional sense - it's a pile of work that many teams might need to work on, with a timeline (if not deadline) - you're saying "we will deliver X, aiming to do it by Y". 

In Jira, a project is a collection of issues that need to be configured the same (most importantly in the config - who can do what with them), grouped together for any number of different reasons.  A project could be a single deliverable with a timeline, but it could be parts of a deliverable alongside other projects, it could represent a team's work, it could be a neverending stream of new issues (support project for example)

However, in Jira, an Epic is a pile of work that many teams might need to work on, with a timeline (if not deadline) - you're saying "we will deliver X, aiming to do it by Y". 

So I think the Atlas project -> Jira Epic mapping makes a lot more sense than project = project.

But I do think it would be good to be able to map project = project in some cases.  Some Jira projects really are projects.  I've set up an automation that does "if project in (a, b, c) and issue is created, set epic link to the epic for a, b, or c, so that Atlas recognises them correctly" quite recently.

Like # people like this

Thanks for commenting, Nic.

Yes, our Jira projects are projects with cross functional teams working on them. So to be able to have Atlas projects = Jira projects would be ideal so we can give an update at the project level.

At the least, Atlassian should not have name them "projects" in Atlas as that tends to lead to confusion. 

Just my 2 cents.

I think your 2c is right, it would be useful to have project = project, and I don't like that they have the same name for different ideas.  Personally, I'd prefer to change the name in Jira, but there's 20 years of history to deal with there.

Like # people like this


Log in or Sign up to comment

Atlassian Community Events