Uploaded image for project: 'JIRA Agile'
  1. JIRA Agile
  2. GHS-1800

Support multiple projects within GreenHopper

    Details

    • Feedback Policy:

      JIRA feedback is collected from a number of different sources and is evaluated when planning the product roadmap. If you would like to know more about how JIRA Product Management uses customer input during the planning process, please see our post on Atlassian Answers.

    • Current Status:
      Hide
      Atlassian Status as at October 24 2011

      Hello Folks,

      Viewing issues from multiple JIRA projects is now a reality on the Rapid Board. You can prioritise stories in your backlog from multiple projects.

      For full details please see the GreenHopper 5.8 release announcement.

      The team will be continuing to iterate and improve the Rapid Board in upcoming releases. More details on the future of GreenHopper is available here.

      Thank you.

      Regards,
      Nicholas Muldoon

      Show
      Atlassian Status as at October 24 2011 Hello Folks, Viewing issues from multiple JIRA projects is now a reality on the Rapid Board. You can prioritise stories in your backlog from multiple projects. For full details please see the GreenHopper 5.8 release announcement . The team will be continuing to iterate and improve the Rapid Board in upcoming releases. More details on the future of GreenHopper is available here . Thank you. Regards, Nicholas Muldoon

      Issue Links

        Activity

        Hide
        kren Kelson Ren added a comment -

        Hi, Nick,

        As what we shortly discussed today, I assume this request should cover the requirement to make Epic label/board support cross-project linking, e.g. epic board triggered from epic issue can show the cross-project linked issues.

        Cheers,
        Kelson

        Show
        kren Kelson Ren added a comment - Hi, Nick, As what we shortly discussed today, I assume this request should cover the requirement to make Epic label/board support cross-project linking, e.g. epic board triggered from epic issue can show the cross-project linked issues. Cheers, Kelson
        Hide
        havard Havard Havard added a comment -

        We have now been evaluating GreenHopper for a month, and it is a great companion to Jira. However, as we have to make a decision whether to purchase GH or continue without it - this is the one feature that makes us drag our feet... With this feature in place, we'd sign up immediately. Are you able to give any indication about when it might get implemented? Are we talking 2010 or 2011?

        Show
        havard Havard Havard added a comment - We have now been evaluating GreenHopper for a month, and it is a great companion to Jira. However, as we have to make a decision whether to purchase GH or continue without it - this is the one feature that makes us drag our feet... With this feature in place, we'd sign up immediately. Are you able to give any indication about when it might get implemented? Are we talking 2010 or 2011?
        Hide
        eikesgei Geir Eikeskog added a comment -

        This is a showstopper for us as well. See this tread for more info: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?messageID=257335789
        After upgrading to Jira 4 it has been a great disappointment not being able to fully utilize Greehopper.

        Show
        eikesgei Geir Eikeskog added a comment - This is a showstopper for us as well. See this tread for more info: http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?messageID=257335789 After upgrading to Jira 4 it has been a great disappointment not being able to fully utilize Greehopper.
        Hide
        chellejohn Michelle Johnson added a comment -

        I agree that this is a great feature. However i also agree that it needs to be implemented carefully. Not all teams have multiple projects running in simultaneous sprints. For example my company has over 100 JIRA projects but only 3 impact my team. While it would be nice to have a planning board that allowed me to plan all 3 projects at the same time, i wouldn't want to do it at the expense of having to browse thru 97 project that don't.

        So we'd probably need changes to the configuration board to allow us to specify which projects & versions we want to display.

        Show
        chellejohn Michelle Johnson added a comment - I agree that this is a great feature. However i also agree that it needs to be implemented carefully. Not all teams have multiple projects running in simultaneous sprints. For example my company has over 100 JIRA projects but only 3 impact my team. While it would be nice to have a planning board that allowed me to plan all 3 projects at the same time, i wouldn't want to do it at the expense of having to browse thru 97 project that don't. So we'd probably need changes to the configuration board to allow us to specify which projects & versions we want to display.
        Hide
        netcomrade Andrey Dmitriev added a comment -

        I think if it's just made based on filters, it should take care of a lot of problems. Security should apply the way it does now. Should display all components (in our case always the same). Can't comment on 'release date' and fixversions as we don't use them. In our case (where we use Jira as support system), components are the same, security is different per project (but really on project level, not on issue level), workflows are also the same.

        Show
        netcomrade Andrey Dmitriev added a comment - I think if it's just made based on filters, it should take care of a lot of problems. Security should apply the way it does now. Should display all components (in our case always the same). Can't comment on 'release date' and fixversions as we don't use them. In our case (where we use Jira as support system), components are the same, security is different per project (but really on project level, not on issue level), workflows are also the same.
        Hide
        eikesgei Geir Eikeskog added a comment -

        Agree with Andrey's comment. We can start using Greenhopper if we had a filter on the Task Board/Chart Board where we can chose Context and Project Overview (like we do on the Planning Board). Then the burndown chart could be based on either the release date for version (if Version in filter) or a configurable date (if Context and project overview in filter).

        Show
        eikesgei Geir Eikeskog added a comment - Agree with Andrey's comment. We can start using Greenhopper if we had a filter on the Task Board/Chart Board where we can chose Context and Project Overview (like we do on the Planning Board). Then the burndown chart could be based on either the release date for version (if Version in filter) or a configurable date (if Context and project overview in filter).
        Hide
        tmoore Tim Moore [Atlassian] added a comment -

        A JIRA Studio customer has also requested this: https://studio.atlassian.com/browse/JST-2578

        Show
        tmoore Tim Moore [Atlassian] added a comment - A JIRA Studio customer has also requested this: https://studio.atlassian.com/browse/JST-2578
        Hide
        davidh David Higgins added a comment -

        Show-stopper here as well. I so want to use JIRA for our agile management but without support for multiple projects there is not much use proceeding any further unfortunately.

        Show
        davidh David Higgins added a comment - Show-stopper here as well. I so want to use JIRA for our agile management but without support for multiple projects there is not much use proceeding any further unfortunately.
        Hide
        jeff@thistech.com Jeff Sherwin added a comment -

        Agreed. Without it, there's no real way to manage a pool of resource developers across dependent projects that must release in a single milestone.

        Show
        jeff@thistech.com Jeff Sherwin added a comment - Agreed. Without it, there's no real way to manage a pool of resource developers across dependent projects that must release in a single milestone.
        Hide
        fiikske Nancy Mazur added a comment -

        We're already using JIRA, and recently we bought greenhopper too. Yet without being able to have one single sprint cover multiple projects I'll have to do some other tours of magic to get things sorted...
        Please have the priority of this issue higher...

        Show
        fiikske Nancy Mazur added a comment - We're already using JIRA, and recently we bought greenhopper too. Yet without being able to have one single sprint cover multiple projects I'll have to do some other tours of magic to get things sorted... Please have the priority of this issue higher...
        Hide
        dmarks@emergemd.com Dylan Marks added a comment -

        I think the solution here is hierarchical projects. That way you can drill down to a subproject if a team is narrowly focused, or have program level review of the backlog and be able to order stories across multiple sub-projects. As Michelle Johnson said, she only wants to see her 3 connected projects instead of 100... this would be solved if those three were part of a parent project. VersionOne uses this approach quite nicely.

        The biggest weakness right now in Jira/GreenHopper is the lack of metadata associated with projects, so it is hard for a team that handles a lot of small projects at once to juggle priorities across the project portfolio. Simply making the projects have a parent/child relationship would really help.

        Show
        dmarks@emergemd.com Dylan Marks added a comment - I think the solution here is hierarchical projects. That way you can drill down to a subproject if a team is narrowly focused, or have program level review of the backlog and be able to order stories across multiple sub-projects. As Michelle Johnson said, she only wants to see her 3 connected projects instead of 100... this would be solved if those three were part of a parent project. VersionOne uses this approach quite nicely. The biggest weakness right now in Jira/GreenHopper is the lack of metadata associated with projects, so it is hard for a team that handles a lot of small projects at once to juggle priorities across the project portfolio. Simply making the projects have a parent/child relationship would really help.
        Hide
        jeff@thistech.com Jeff Sherwin added a comment -

        We simulate that now with components, but it doesn't do what we need. We really want separate projects, with separate svn repositories, build processes, etc. Just want to pool developer resources across them.

        Show
        jeff@thistech.com Jeff Sherwin added a comment - We simulate that now with components, but it doesn't do what we need. We really want separate projects, with separate svn repositories, build processes, etc. Just want to pool developer resources across them.
        Hide
        viggo.navarsete Viggo Navarsete added a comment -

        I agree to last comment by Jeff!

        Show
        viggo.navarsete Viggo Navarsete added a comment - I agree to last comment by Jeff!
        Hide
        davidh David Higgins added a comment -

        Agreed, what it really needs is an abstraction above projects. A simple ability to put projects into groups of the user's choosing. A version can then be created around these groupings or (preferably) the due date used in order to create releases.

        Show
        davidh David Higgins added a comment - Agreed, what it really needs is an abstraction above projects. A simple ability to put projects into groups of the user's choosing. A version can then be created around these groupings or (preferably) the due date used in order to create releases.
        Hide
        john.crim John Crim added a comment -

        We'd like to adopt GreenHopper, the planning boards and workload management tools look great, as do the the burn-down and burn-up charts. However, we can't, because our sprints span multiple projects.

        GreenHopper's insistence that sprints are versions is our show-stopper for adopting GreenHopper. In my opinion it incorrectly models what a sprint is in Scrum; and it is broken for any company where any individual works on more than one project during a sprint. This has bugged me for several years, I'm glad to see GreenHopper join Atlassian, but I'm surprised this issue has not been addressed yet.

        In the absence of a professional plugin that meets our needs, we use a custom "Sprint" (Select List) field (values "sprint 1", "sprint 2", ...), and we use some SQL scripts to generate burndown charts. The sprint field is global, and if we want team-scoped sprints, we insert a team name into the sprint name.

        I'd really like to see the GreenHopper team implement a new custom field type, for managing Sprints. Call it a "Sprint field". Sprints should have a start and end date, and a team. It should be easy to create new sprints from existing sprints (eg, same team, next 3 consecutive weeks). And, all the task planning and management tools within GreenHopper would work for scheduling and tracking work within a sprint.

        A sprint is a block of time for a team to accomplish something; It is much more appropriate to bind a sprint to a Group of users than to bind it to a single project. Work is scheduled and tracked for the sprint; and in many cases this work will span multiple projects. I think of a sprint as a bucket that issues (from any project) are mapped into.

        A version is a release of a project, containing a set of new features/improvements/bugs. The model of a version is Jira is solid, time-tested, and works well for us. But versions and releases have no direct association with what sprint the work was done.

        Show
        john.crim John Crim added a comment - We'd like to adopt GreenHopper, the planning boards and workload management tools look great, as do the the burn-down and burn-up charts. However, we can't, because our sprints span multiple projects. GreenHopper's insistence that sprints are versions is our show-stopper for adopting GreenHopper. In my opinion it incorrectly models what a sprint is in Scrum; and it is broken for any company where any individual works on more than one project during a sprint. This has bugged me for several years, I'm glad to see GreenHopper join Atlassian, but I'm surprised this issue has not been addressed yet. In the absence of a professional plugin that meets our needs, we use a custom "Sprint" (Select List) field (values "sprint 1", "sprint 2", ...), and we use some SQL scripts to generate burndown charts. The sprint field is global, and if we want team-scoped sprints, we insert a team name into the sprint name. I'd really like to see the GreenHopper team implement a new custom field type, for managing Sprints. Call it a "Sprint field". Sprints should have a start and end date, and a team. It should be easy to create new sprints from existing sprints (eg, same team, next 3 consecutive weeks). And, all the task planning and management tools within GreenHopper would work for scheduling and tracking work within a sprint. A sprint is a block of time for a team to accomplish something; It is much more appropriate to bind a sprint to a Group of users than to bind it to a single project. Work is scheduled and tracked for the sprint; and in many cases this work will span multiple projects. I think of a sprint as a bucket that issues (from any project) are mapped into. A version is a release of a project, containing a set of new features/improvements/bugs. The model of a version is Jira is solid, time-tested, and works well for us. But versions and releases have no direct association with what sprint the work was done.
        Hide
        francisl@marketleader.com Francis Lau added a comment -

        Similarly, in our situation, developers work on multiple projects and we need a way for product managers to rank tickets in a single view that shows tickets from multiple projects. This is very important for us too.

        Show
        francisl@marketleader.com Francis Lau added a comment - Similarly, in our situation, developers work on multiple projects and we need a way for product managers to rank tickets in a single view that shows tickets from multiple projects. This is very important for us too.
        Hide
        jbrito Jason Brito added a comment -

        We are evaluating GH and another right Agile PM tool now.

        One nice features is to see resources across projects, with visual signals when resources are over allocated. Developers are typically dedicated to one project but other resources like DBA's are not.

        Another is to see project status like burn down charts for multiple projects on one page.

        Show
        jbrito Jason Brito added a comment - We are evaluating GH and another right Agile PM tool now. One nice features is to see resources across projects, with visual signals when resources are over allocated. Developers are typically dedicated to one project but other resources like DBA's are not. Another is to see project status like burn down charts for multiple projects on one page.
        Hide
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment -

        This is an extremely important feature for us as well. Waiting for this to be implemented before we start using greenhopper in our organization. We currently use just jira, and a wiki for agile project planning.

        Show
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment - This is an extremely important feature for us as well. Waiting for this to be implemented before we start using greenhopper in our organization. We currently use just jira, and a wiki for agile project planning.
        Hide
        klausstake Klaus Stake added a comment -

        I am also interested in a multiple projects feature. The reason behind is that I need worklog statistics for each project.

        I found a workaround for my company's environment which has enabled the Scrum methodology.

        I have installed the Minyaa Time plugin which offers several reports. For example I can generate worklog reports for specific components!

        What I have done is creating a new dedicated project for the Scrum Product Backlog. For each project I have created a component. I mean that I use the field "component" for defining all projects. This is o.k. for us, because we don't need the component field for anything else.
        Having this done I can generate worklog reports as wanted by our business controller.

        I hope that this might help others who are waiting for a better multiple projects support as well.

        Show
        klausstake Klaus Stake added a comment - I am also interested in a multiple projects feature. The reason behind is that I need worklog statistics for each project. I found a workaround for my company's environment which has enabled the Scrum methodology. I have installed the Minyaa Time plugin which offers several reports. For example I can generate worklog reports for specific components! What I have done is creating a new dedicated project for the Scrum Product Backlog. For each project I have created a component . I mean that I use the field "component" for defining all projects. This is o.k. for us, because we don't need the component field for anything else. Having this done I can generate worklog reports as wanted by our business controller. I hope that this might help others who are waiting for a better multiple projects support as well.
        Hide
        hayes@vivisimo.com Phil Hayes added a comment -

        I would like to indicate our strong interest in this capability. We are in a situation where a given group of developers typically works on a small number (2-4) different projects at once. We can set things up nicely for each project individually, but we don't see a way to have aggregate work-in-progress limits across multiple projects or have a single planning board where you could prioritize tasks from several projects. This is further discussed in EHSP-9201

        Show
        hayes@vivisimo.com Phil Hayes added a comment - I would like to indicate our strong interest in this capability. We are in a situation where a given group of developers typically works on a small number (2-4) different projects at once. We can set things up nicely for each project individually, but we don't see a way to have aggregate work-in-progress limits across multiple projects or have a single planning board where you could prioritize tasks from several projects. This is further discussed in EHSP-9201
        Hide
        tverhagen T Verhagen added a comment - - edited

        IMO the issue GHS-945 is very close related to this one.

        Show
        tverhagen T Verhagen added a comment - - edited IMO the issue GHS-945 is very close related to this one.
        Hide
        bba Bram Baptiste added a comment -

        This is also a show stopper for our company for buying greenhopper.
        Several small teams work on several different project at once.
        So for example my team consists of 6 developers which can work on 20 project for on big system release.
        So it's possible that for sprint 1 we are working on the back end and the nbi projects, for sprint 2 we are working on 3 different projects and in sprint working on 2 projects of the first sprint and 2 of sprint 2.

        So I also want to plan the sprints on a multiple project base to see team load,...

        Do you think it will be feasible in the near future?

        An extra hurdle is also that for all projects are using different version. So I added some custom field "system fixed version" and "system affected version" to line up the system releases. The dedicated project versions in JIRA are lined up with the maven versions of our code base. So with saved filter and excel I can do some kind of planning, but It would be much easier if GreenHopper supports this.

        Any suggestion on a different approach is also more then welcome.

        Show
        bba Bram Baptiste added a comment - This is also a show stopper for our company for buying greenhopper. Several small teams work on several different project at once. So for example my team consists of 6 developers which can work on 20 project for on big system release. So it's possible that for sprint 1 we are working on the back end and the nbi projects, for sprint 2 we are working on 3 different projects and in sprint working on 2 projects of the first sprint and 2 of sprint 2. So I also want to plan the sprints on a multiple project base to see team load,... Do you think it will be feasible in the near future? An extra hurdle is also that for all projects are using different version. So I added some custom field "system fixed version" and "system affected version" to line up the system releases. The dedicated project versions in JIRA are lined up with the maven versions of our code base. So with saved filter and excel I can do some kind of planning, but It would be much easier if GreenHopper supports this. Any suggestion on a different approach is also more then welcome.
        Hide
        bdunn Bryan Dunn added a comment -

        I'd also like to express an interest in this capability. We have several small teams that work on many projects in a given sprint. I was about to merge all of our products and use components to separate them (product1-search, product1-share, product2-search, etc). I held off when I saw this ticket was being worked on.

        I'd love see an update on where this stands

        Thanks!

        Show
        bdunn Bryan Dunn added a comment - I'd also like to express an interest in this capability. We have several small teams that work on many projects in a given sprint. I was about to merge all of our products and use components to separate them (product1-search, product1-share, product2-search, etc). I held off when I saw this ticket was being worked on. I'd love see an update on where this stands Thanks!
        Hide
        jaskaran_singh_bawa Jaskaran Singh added a comment -

        Hi, This becomes really important feature if you are delivering products made of several components each of which is a project. Is there a planned date for this? The "Atlassian Status" does not have a date for me figure out which quarter of exploring its referring too!.

        Show
        jaskaran_singh_bawa Jaskaran Singh added a comment - Hi, This becomes really important feature if you are delivering products made of several components each of which is a project. Is there a planned date for this? The "Atlassian Status" does not have a date for me figure out which quarter of exploring its referring too!.
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Updating Atlassian Status to reflect current situation.

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Updating Atlassian Status to reflect current situation.
        Hide
        john.mortimer John Mortimer added a comment -

        We use JIRA/GH and have run into this issue. The limitation to not allow for sprints to span multiple products is a fundamental flaw, in my opinion. A key component of our team structure is to keep the teams the same, however the teams may work on issues that are relevant to multiple products. Currently, you have to set the developer up in multiple projects (which may have different permission schemes).

        I would like to be able to set up a sprint and assign tasks from multiple projects to a developer, with a clear indication of what the developer will be working on for the sprint in order to manage their capacity.

        Show
        john.mortimer John Mortimer added a comment - We use JIRA/GH and have run into this issue. The limitation to not allow for sprints to span multiple products is a fundamental flaw, in my opinion. A key component of our team structure is to keep the teams the same, however the teams may work on issues that are relevant to multiple products. Currently, you have to set the developer up in multiple projects (which may have different permission schemes). I would like to be able to set up a sprint and assign tasks from multiple projects to a developer, with a clear indication of what the developer will be working on for the sprint in order to manage their capacity.
        Hide
        amusson Alec Musson added a comment -

        Not being able to view multiple projects within the task board is also restricting our usage of JIRA. Without this we cannot extend our usage of the tool.

        Show
        amusson Alec Musson added a comment - Not being able to view multiple projects within the task board is also restricting our usage of JIRA. Without this we cannot extend our usage of the tool.
        Hide
        eugenegnatenko Eugene Gnatenko added a comment -

        A VERY needed feature!

        Show
        eugenegnatenko Eugene Gnatenko added a comment - A VERY needed feature!
        Hide
        khawkins Kevin Hawkins added a comment -

        Just want to add another comment that not having this feature is limiting our ability to effectively use JIRA+GH across our organization.

        Show
        khawkins Kevin Hawkins added a comment - Just want to add another comment that not having this feature is limiting our ability to effectively use JIRA+GH across our organization.
        Hide
        rwilcox@descartes.com Ryan Wilcox added a comment -

        any update on this from Atlassian?

        Show
        rwilcox@descartes.com Ryan Wilcox added a comment - any update on this from Atlassian?
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Hello,

        I am looking for people interested in providing feedback on Spike 2.

        This spike is based on the feedback from GHS-2447 where GreenHopper users wish to sort their issues across multiple projects while using sprint versions, as opposed to fixVersions. A separate mode has been added for Sprints on the Planning Board of a "Cross Project". In this spike the sprints are stored as a custom label field and have a start and end date.

        If you are interested in providing feedback on Spike 2 please note:

        • This is not for use on production instances. It will break.
        • You must have a staging server with a backup of your production data in place.
        • You will be driving the direction of multiple project support within GreenHopper.

        Please comment below if you are interested in providing feedback on Spike 2 and I will reach out to you.

        Thank You.
        Nicholas

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Hello, I am looking for people interested in providing feedback on Spike 2. This spike is based on the feedback from GHS-2447 where GreenHopper users wish to sort their issues across multiple projects while using sprint versions, as opposed to fixVersions. A separate mode has been added for Sprints on the Planning Board of a "Cross Project". In this spike the sprints are stored as a custom label field and have a start and end date. If you are interested in providing feedback on Spike 2 please note: This is not for use on production instances. It will break. You must have a staging server with a backup of your production data in place. You will be driving the direction of multiple project support within GreenHopper. Please comment below if you are interested in providing feedback on Spike 2 and I will reach out to you. Thank You. Nicholas
        Hide
        atlassian@quartalfs.com Michael Wagner added a comment -

        Hi Nick,
        of cause I am interested, so where do I need to put my money?
        Regards
        Michael

        Show
        atlassian@quartalfs.com Michael Wagner added a comment - Hi Nick, of cause I am interested, so where do I need to put my money? Regards Michael
        Hide
        tverhagen T Verhagen added a comment -

        Looking forward to see how this has been implemented!

        Show
        tverhagen T Verhagen added a comment - Looking forward to see how this has been implemented!
        Hide
        alexis-tethys Alexis Michaelides added a comment -

        Nicholas,

        Count me in - this would fit perfectly into our current workflow.

        Thanks,
        Alexis

        Show
        alexis-tethys Alexis Michaelides added a comment - Nicholas, Count me in - this would fit perfectly into our current workflow. Thanks, Alexis
        Hide
        andrewwillis Andrew Willis added a comment -

        We would like to help with this as well. This is very close to our needs and we have a test environment that we can easily roll this out to.

        Show
        andrewwillis Andrew Willis added a comment - We would like to help with this as well. This is very close to our needs and we have a test environment that we can easily roll this out to.
        Hide
        brianf Brian Fox added a comment -

        We can try it also.

        Show
        brianf Brian Fox added a comment - We can try it also.
        Hide
        jneuharth Jeremy Neuharth added a comment -

        Nicholas,

        We have an environment that we could use to send you some feedback regarding the feature. If you want another person to test you can count us in.

        Respectfully,

        -Jeremy

        Show
        jneuharth Jeremy Neuharth added a comment - Nicholas, We have an environment that we could use to send you some feedback regarding the feature. If you want another person to test you can count us in. Respectfully, -Jeremy
        Hide
        ganga.selvarajah Ganga Selvarajah added a comment -

        Please count me also in the list. We have an environment to test this feature.

        Thanks
        Ganga

        Show
        ganga.selvarajah Ganga Selvarajah added a comment - Please count me also in the list. We have an environment to test this feature. Thanks Ganga
        Hide
        davidh David Higgins added a comment -

        We have a test instance ready and waiting so count us in.

        Show
        davidh David Higgins added a comment - We have a test instance ready and waiting so count us in.
        Hide
        sts Stephan added a comment -

        Please contact me too.. thanks in advance!

        Show
        sts Stephan added a comment - Please contact me too.. thanks in advance!
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        I'll email all nine who responded above. More details will follow here in late October.

        Thank You,
        Nicholas Muldoon

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - I'll email all nine who responded above. More details will follow here in late October. Thank You, Nicholas Muldoon
        Hide
        gisela.sn Gisela S Nogueira added a comment - - edited

        Please add me in the list, I have a test instance.

        I like the concept of swimlanes as the links below. You could use this concept in many ways, like select the projects and the field desire to group by, each value of the field is a swimlane, like a custom field as cliente id or components or project.

        http://leansoftwareengineering.com/2009/07/01/a-swimlane-for-ad-hoc-workflow/
        http://leansoftwareengineering.com/2007/10/27/kanban-bootstrap/

        Show
        gisela.sn Gisela S Nogueira added a comment - - edited Please add me in the list, I have a test instance. I like the concept of swimlanes as the links below. You could use this concept in many ways, like select the projects and the field desire to group by, each value of the field is a swimlane, like a custom field as cliente id or components or project. http://leansoftwareengineering.com/2009/07/01/a-swimlane-for-ad-hoc-workflow/ http://leansoftwareengineering.com/2007/10/27/kanban-bootstrap/
        Hide
        khawkins Kevin Hawkins added a comment -

        One key capability that would make multiple project support better for us is if Epics showed linked issues across multiple projects. Right now when viewing an Epic you can only see issues linked to that Epic if they are in the same project as the Epic - so trying to view an Epic's progress is useless unless all the linked issues to that Epic are in the same project. We are trying to link issues to Epics that span across multiple projects for multi-discipline teams so we can use the system to manage derived requirements across those teams while measuring progress of high-level requirements and capabilities. Maybe this should be another issue (it's a bug in my mind - Epics should properly tie to all linked issues, regardless of project)? Or is it something that is considered part of supporting multiple projects?

        Show
        khawkins Kevin Hawkins added a comment - One key capability that would make multiple project support better for us is if Epics showed linked issues across multiple projects. Right now when viewing an Epic you can only see issues linked to that Epic if they are in the same project as the Epic - so trying to view an Epic's progress is useless unless all the linked issues to that Epic are in the same project. We are trying to link issues to Epics that span across multiple projects for multi-discipline teams so we can use the system to manage derived requirements across those teams while measuring progress of high-level requirements and capabilities. Maybe this should be another issue (it's a bug in my mind - Epics should properly tie to all linked issues, regardless of project)? Or is it something that is considered part of supporting multiple projects?
        Hide
        bdemers Brian Demers added a comment -

        Seems better then the first spike. I like how the projects are aggregated under a X-Project. And Greenhopper uses sprints instead of versions (which is more correct) I assume the fix versions are unrelated to the sprints?

        I was able to create an X-Project, but I was not able to move issues into a new sprint do to an 'insufficient privileges' error. ( I am was jira admin, and an admin of projects contained within my X-Project )

        Is the rank still global?

        Seems like good progress!

        Show
        bdemers Brian Demers added a comment - Seems better then the first spike. I like how the projects are aggregated under a X-Project. And Greenhopper uses sprints instead of versions (which is more correct) I assume the fix versions are unrelated to the sprints? I was able to create an X-Project, but I was not able to move issues into a new sprint do to an 'insufficient privileges' error. ( I am was jira admin, and an admin of projects contained within my X-Project ) Is the rank still global? Seems like good progress!
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Updating Atlassian Status to reflect the start of GreenHopper 6.0.

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Updating Atlassian Status to reflect the start of GreenHopper 6.0.
        Hide
        thecodewerks Christopher McGinnis added a comment -

        I was working on a small team where a single project worked fine. The company has consolidated my team with two others which means that the new larger team supports multiple properties which makes using Greenhopper a little harder. I would like to see multiple project/property management capabilities in Greenhopper.

        Show
        thecodewerks Christopher McGinnis added a comment - I was working on a small team where a single project worked fine. The company has consolidated my team with two others which means that the new larger team supports multiple properties which makes using Greenhopper a little harder. I would like to see multiple project/property management capabilities in Greenhopper.
        Hide
        afattahi Anas Fattahi added a comment -

        Count on me for testing. I am currently managing production support and without multiple projects support in GreenHopper life is very hard. I'd like to participate in testing the new features.

        Show
        afattahi Anas Fattahi added a comment - Count on me for testing. I am currently managing production support and without multiple projects support in GreenHopper life is very hard. I'd like to participate in testing the new features.
        Hide
        cbrown@backstopsolutions.com Chris Brown added a comment -

        Hi Nick and JC – we'd also like to test; we run multiple projects in JIRA and have a full-volume production mirror that we use for testing workflow changes and the like. We'd be able to provide rapid feedback. Thanks!

        Show
        cbrown@backstopsolutions.com Chris Brown added a comment - Hi Nick and JC – we'd also like to test; we run multiple projects in JIRA and have a full-volume production mirror that we use for testing workflow changes and the like. We'd be able to provide rapid feedback. Thanks!
        Hide
        mhuerta Micah Huerta added a comment -

        This will be huge for us as well, as we rank issues by Business Line (Category). We are evaluating right now, and this feature will get a sure sale. Is there any way we can get on board with testing this feature ASAP? It would greatly help me garner support for a purchase.

        Show
        mhuerta Micah Huerta added a comment - This will be huge for us as well, as we rank issues by Business Line (Category). We are evaluating right now, and this feature will get a sure sale. Is there any way we can get on board with testing this feature ASAP? It would greatly help me garner support for a purchase.
        Hide
        tkampp Thorsten Kampp added a comment -

        Hi Nick, we'd also participate in testing an would of course provide feedback for any further spike or beta version (If I am not mistaken the greenhopper version on greenhopper.onjira.com doesn't include this functionality currently)

        In general we're using several JIRA projects for individual products and components. The teams usually work on stories spanning several JIRA projects so Greenhopper is not an option for usage right now.

        Show
        tkampp Thorsten Kampp added a comment - Hi Nick, we'd also participate in testing an would of course provide feedback for any further spike or beta version (If I am not mistaken the greenhopper version on greenhopper.onjira.com doesn't include this functionality currently) In general we're using several JIRA projects for individual products and components. The teams usually work on stories spanning several JIRA projects so Greenhopper is not an option for usage right now.
        Hide
        shante.adam Shante Adam added a comment -

        +1 Org which requires this feature.

        Show
        shante.adam Shante Adam added a comment - +1 Org which requires this feature.
        Hide
        sales@mediabandit.co.uk andy added a comment -

        Hi there. This is awesome. If we could have early access to help with testing we would gladly provide feedback too!

        Show
        sales@mediabandit.co.uk andy added a comment - Hi there. This is awesome. If we could have early access to help with testing we would gladly provide feedback too!
        Hide
        jorgenbakkeeriksen Jørgen Eriksen added a comment -

        Just jumping in to flag my support for this. Something as "simple" as cross project issue ranking (drag 'n drop order of tasks across multiple projects) on f.ex the planning board will be a HUGE benefit in day-to-day task planning for our company. Looking forward to this and I think this will be a killer for GreenHopper!

        Show
        jorgenbakkeeriksen Jørgen Eriksen added a comment - Just jumping in to flag my support for this. Something as "simple" as cross project issue ranking (drag 'n drop order of tasks across multiple projects) on f.ex the planning board will be a HUGE benefit in day-to-day task planning for our company. Looking forward to this and I think this will be a killer for GreenHopper!
        Hide
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment -

        When can we expect this feature to be rolled out? We are eagerly waiting.

        Thanks
        Luna

        Show
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment - When can we expect this feature to be rolled out? We are eagerly waiting. Thanks Luna
        Hide
        andrewmwebster Andrew Webster added a comment -

        +10 for this!
        We have a team of 40 people who are expected to be working on a total of about 50 projects.

        Madness.

        This has arisen because we've not had adequate visibility of the total workload, so our managers haven't got a leg to stand on when negotiating with the business. If we can make this ridiculous workload visible, then we can point to it and start saying "No" or "Help us renegotiate" with integrity and rebuild a trust-based relationship.

        We urgently need a multiple project view.

        Show
        andrewmwebster Andrew Webster added a comment - +10 for this! We have a team of 40 people who are expected to be working on a total of about 50 projects. Madness. This has arisen because we've not had adequate visibility of the total workload, so our managers haven't got a leg to stand on when negotiating with the business. If we can make this ridiculous workload visible, then we can point to it and start saying "No" or "Help us renegotiate" with integrity and rebuild a trust-based relationship. We urgently need a multiple project view.
        Hide
        mvidutis Mantas Vidutis added a comment -

        My team made a retrospective goal which would be best implemented by a multi-project task board view. What is the status of the EAP, as my company would like to be heavily involved?

        Don't make me open up a bunch of tabs, man...

        Show
        mvidutis Mantas Vidutis added a comment - My team made a retrospective goal which would be best implemented by a multi-project task board view. What is the status of the EAP, as my company would like to be heavily involved? Don't make me open up a bunch of tabs, man...
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment -

        This too would be a major benefit to our multi-project setup.

        Since we are nearly 6 months further than the "October 27 2010" status at the top of this page, can I ask Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) to update this? In particular, I guess the thing we are all looking to see is the release date. Is "we are looking at an early 2011 release date" still the best estimate?

        Thanks for a quick response!

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - This too would be a major benefit to our multi-project setup. Since we are nearly 6 months further than the "October 27 2010" status at the top of this page, can I ask Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) to update this? In particular, I guess the thing we are all looking to see is the release date. Is "we are looking at an early 2011 release date" still the best estimate? Thanks for a quick response!
        Hide
        mistamolle Morten Sommer added a comment -

        I can only agree with my fellow jira-pm-users who need the possibility to easily manage sprints with tasks from several projects.

        It would rock my world, and please my boss, so - please prioritize this feature in your coming release.

        Thanks in advance!

        Show
        mistamolle Morten Sommer added a comment - I can only agree with my fellow jira-pm-users who need the possibility to easily manage sprints with tasks from several projects. It would rock my world, and please my boss, so - please prioritize this feature in your coming release. Thanks in advance!
        Hide
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment -

        I agree. Having a timeline greatly helps. We have been waiting for this feature for a while now, and we will not be buying greenhopper until this is implemented. It would be most helpful to know if a solution is coming within the next month or two.

        Show
        luna@northwestern.edu Luna Rajbhandari added a comment - I agree. Having a timeline greatly helps. We have been waiting for this feature for a while now, and we will not be buying greenhopper until this is implemented. It would be most helpful to know if a solution is coming within the next month or two.
        Hide
        simonstanton Simon Stanton added a comment -

        Same here - I'm evaluating GreenHopper right now - I love it. But, at the risk of hyperbole, this is could make or break it for us, in terms of day to day usability. All my existing dashboards and filters in jira span multiple projects for a given version. It's quite a shock to have to split that up again - I'm finding it more clunky to get a true/whole picture of what is going on.

        Show
        simonstanton Simon Stanton added a comment - Same here - I'm evaluating GreenHopper right now - I love it. But, at the risk of hyperbole, this is could make or break it for us, in terms of day to day usability. All my existing dashboards and filters in jira span multiple projects for a given version. It's quite a shock to have to split that up again - I'm finding it more clunky to get a true/whole picture of what is going on.
        Hide
        daviesp@janelia.hhmi.org Peter Davies added a comment -

        I run a group of 20 Software Engineers, many with different technical skill sets, in a Scientific Research environment. Each is tasked with at least two and at times four projects concurrently. While we have Greenhopper and use it for some of the larger projects, it is of limited value to my team currently. Ideally, I want to be able to apply a percentage of time for each developer to each project and see when developers might be available to take on a new project. I also want to ensure I am not overtasking any single developer at any point in time. My counter-part, who runs a hardware shop with similar project load, loves to tell me how well Microsoft Project handles this situation as he readily pulls out Gantt charts. As a software guy, I tend to loath management by Gantt, but at the current time, Greenhopper does not provide the tools for a larger team working many smaller projects concurrently.

        Show
        daviesp@janelia.hhmi.org Peter Davies added a comment - I run a group of 20 Software Engineers, many with different technical skill sets, in a Scientific Research environment. Each is tasked with at least two and at times four projects concurrently. While we have Greenhopper and use it for some of the larger projects, it is of limited value to my team currently. Ideally, I want to be able to apply a percentage of time for each developer to each project and see when developers might be available to take on a new project. I also want to ensure I am not overtasking any single developer at any point in time. My counter-part, who runs a hardware shop with similar project load, loves to tell me how well Microsoft Project handles this situation as he readily pulls out Gantt charts. As a software guy, I tend to loath management by Gantt, but at the current time, Greenhopper does not provide the tools for a larger team working many smaller projects concurrently.
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - - edited

        If Peter, it's Project Management and Jira you are looking for, you may be interested in the Turning JIRA into a Complete Project Management Solution video about the Onepoint product.

        I'm looking more for a "Single Product Backlog" across multiple projects perspective (currently fudged with Jira filters), so we are looking more for a very agile solution such as Greenhopper rather than a heavy Gantt-chart style solution.

        Hence for us, Greenhopper 6.0 sounds like what we need.

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - - edited If Peter, it's Project Management and Jira you are looking for, you may be interested in the Turning JIRA into a Complete Project Management Solution video about the Onepoint product. I'm looking more for a "Single Product Backlog" across multiple projects perspective (currently fudged with Jira filters), so we are looking more for a very agile solution such as Greenhopper rather than a heavy Gantt-chart style solution. Hence for us, Greenhopper 6.0 sounds like what we need.
        Hide
        jshomphe@arrowheadgrp.com Joe Shomphe added a comment -

        We would love to get our hands on the code from spike2/3

        who can we contact about this?

        Show
        jshomphe@arrowheadgrp.com Joe Shomphe added a comment - We would love to get our hands on the code from spike2/3 who can we contact about this?
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - - edited

        Since neither Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) has responded to my request above (10th March 2011) to update the status, here is another indication (taken from http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?threadID=51736):

        "As far as GreenHopper 6 with multi-project support is concerned, I am afraid that it might be a little longer than just the near future. We are currently pushing to get it ready by Summit but this large of a release might get pushed back even further. I will keep my eyes peeled for you."

        i.e. they are pushing to get it ready by 6th-8th June 2011 (http://summit.atlassian.com/) though it "might get pushed back even further".

        Hmmm. It would be nice if Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) would update the "Atlassian status" of this thread to give us the best insider-information rather than relying on this sort of detective work. We understand that dates change, products slip, but we would like to know!

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - - edited Since neither Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) has responded to my request above (10th March 2011) to update the status, here is another indication (taken from http://forums.atlassian.com/thread.jspa?threadID=51736): "As far as GreenHopper 6 with multi-project support is concerned, I am afraid that it might be a little longer than just the near future. We are currently pushing to get it ready by Summit but this large of a release might get pushed back even further. I will keep my eyes peeled for you." i.e. they are pushing to get it ready by 6th-8th June 2011 ( http://summit.atlassian.com/ ) though it "might get pushed back even further". Hmmm. It would be nice if Nicholas Muldoon (or someone else from Atlassian) would update the "Atlassian status" of this thread to give us the best insider-information rather than relying on this sort of detective work. We understand that dates change, products slip, but we would like to know!
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment -

        Something else I notice from the Atlassian Summit agenda (http://summit.atlassian.com/agenda) is that Nick Muldoon (the owner of this thread) is presenting there a talk on:
        "Managing a single backlog across multiple projects"

        That's what we're all wanting!

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - Something else I notice from the Atlassian Summit agenda ( http://summit.atlassian.com/agenda ) is that Nick Muldoon (the owner of this thread) is presenting there a talk on: "Managing a single backlog across multiple projects" That's what we're all wanting!
        Hide
        ganga.selvarajah Ganga Selvarajah added a comment -

        Good to hear that!

        We're all waiting know the detail implementation of this functionality.

        Show
        ganga.selvarajah Ganga Selvarajah added a comment - Good to hear that! We're all waiting know the detail implementation of this functionality.
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Adding updated Atlassian Status.

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Adding updated Atlassian Status.
        Hide
        yoramhalberstam@michaelpage.com Yoram Halberstam added a comment -

        Hi,

        We have the same problem here. I've looked through the history of this ticket. Am I right in thinking that it wil be available a Summit in June? What's the timeline looking like?

        Cheers

        Show
        yoramhalberstam@michaelpage.com Yoram Halberstam added a comment - Hi, We have the same problem here. I've looked through the history of this ticket. Am I right in thinking that it wil be available a Summit in June? What's the timeline looking like? Cheers
        Hide
        daniel.laberge@eccsolutions.ca Daniel Laberge added a comment -

        This new functionnality would be welcomed with enthusiasm at our company. Any official updates on the timeline would be appreciated.

        Show
        daniel.laberge@eccsolutions.ca Daniel Laberge added a comment - This new functionnality would be welcomed with enthusiasm at our company. Any official updates on the timeline would be appreciated.
        Hide
        gerrickw Gerrick W added a comment - - edited

        Something else I notice from the Atlassian Summit agenda (http://summit.atlassian.com/agenda) is that Nick Muldoon (the owner of this thread) is presenting there a talk on:
        "Managing a single backlog across multiple projects"

        That's what we're all wanting!

        I no longer see this topic within the summit agenda, is there still an expectation of a discussion/demo/alpha/beta or timeline of a multi-product greenhopper backlog view?

        Show
        gerrickw Gerrick W added a comment - - edited Something else I notice from the Atlassian Summit agenda ( http://summit.atlassian.com/agenda ) is that Nick Muldoon (the owner of this thread) is presenting there a talk on: "Managing a single backlog across multiple projects" That's what we're all wanting! I no longer see this topic within the summit agenda, is there still an expectation of a discussion/demo/alpha/beta or timeline of a multi-product greenhopper backlog view?
        Hide
        dofinity dofinity added a comment -

        We were waiting eagerly but patiently for the demo and the solution behind that.
        Any news on that?

        Show
        dofinity dofinity added a comment - We were waiting eagerly but patiently for the demo and the solution behind that. Any news on that?
        Hide
        gguta Gabor Guta added a comment -

        Are there any GreenHopper EAP?

        Show
        gguta Gabor Guta added a comment - Are there any GreenHopper EAP?
        Hide
        felix.tunbjer Emanuel Felix Tunbjer added a comment -

        You can read more about the functionalities in the Rapid Board here http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/GH/Using+the+Rapid+Board
        and also actually try it out in your own local Jira instance.

        Show
        felix.tunbjer Emanuel Felix Tunbjer added a comment - You can read more about the functionalities in the Rapid Board here http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/GH/Using+the+Rapid+Board and also actually try it out in your own local Jira instance.
        Hide
        pjp Pat Pigatti added a comment -

        This looks good. It would be even nicer if you could drill down further by assignee that spans multiple projects. Otherwise, this would force one to create a filter per assignee if people want to use this to go over one's workload across the board which I would like to do. Or one would just use Jira to view the filter results and not use Greenhopper for going over an individual's workload that spans multiple Jira projects.

        Show
        pjp Pat Pigatti added a comment - This looks good. It would be even nicer if you could drill down further by assignee that spans multiple projects. Otherwise, this would force one to create a filter per assignee if people want to use this to go over one's workload across the board which I would like to do. Or one would just use Jira to view the filter results and not use Greenhopper for going over an individual's workload that spans multiple Jira projects.
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment -

        Thanks Nicholas for the status update (currently "Atlassian Status as at April 6 2011"), as I was requesting an update from the October 2010 status in my post comment-232133.

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - Thanks Nicholas for the status update (currently "Atlassian Status as at April 6 2011"), as I was requesting an update from the October 2010 status in my post comment-232133 .
        Hide
        kphillips Kevin Phillips added a comment -

        I noticed there doesn't seem to be any descriptions of the kinds of workflows that people were expecting from this fix so I thought I'd add my two cents to the mix.

        There are several use cases I can see at the company where I work. The two major categories (which are very similar) can be classified like this:

        Frameworks and Products
        I work for a large company that builds many products and these products share a common set of frameworks and APIs. A typical issue arises when a change (bug fix, enhancement, etc.) requires changes to both the framework and the product. There are typically at least two Jira projects involved with such fixes: one for the framework changes and one for the product changes. What would be nice is if we could create a framework issue and have it appear on the agile boards for all affected teams because the framework team needs to prioritize the work and track it's progress but the product teams also need to stay in synch with this work, monitor the progress and ensure it gets complete before the end of it's sprint (to unblock the product issues required for their sprint).

        Deployment Team
        Another pattern we have, similar to the previous, is we have a single team responsible for managing the installs and deployments for a large number of products. When a product prepares for a release they require a package to be created and hence they need to create an issue in Jira for this. Just as above we have the problem that the product team can either create a new issue in the installation teams project (allowing the install team to find and manage the work) or they can create an issue in the Jira project for the product and assign it to the install team. With the former workflow it is easy for the install team to organize and manage it's team work but it is impossible for the product team to monitor and manage the results from that work. With the latter solution it is easy for the product team to monitor and track the state of their release but it is impossible to effectively manage the work, across products, for the installation team.

        It would be nice, for example, to be able to create a single task board for the install team which manages issues from many product-specific Jira projects. In this way the product teams can monitor and manage their release while still allowing the install team to manage and prioritize their work / backlog.

        Show
        kphillips Kevin Phillips added a comment - I noticed there doesn't seem to be any descriptions of the kinds of workflows that people were expecting from this fix so I thought I'd add my two cents to the mix. There are several use cases I can see at the company where I work. The two major categories (which are very similar) can be classified like this: Frameworks and Products I work for a large company that builds many products and these products share a common set of frameworks and APIs. A typical issue arises when a change (bug fix, enhancement, etc.) requires changes to both the framework and the product. There are typically at least two Jira projects involved with such fixes: one for the framework changes and one for the product changes. What would be nice is if we could create a framework issue and have it appear on the agile boards for all affected teams because the framework team needs to prioritize the work and track it's progress but the product teams also need to stay in synch with this work, monitor the progress and ensure it gets complete before the end of it's sprint (to unblock the product issues required for their sprint). Deployment Team Another pattern we have, similar to the previous, is we have a single team responsible for managing the installs and deployments for a large number of products. When a product prepares for a release they require a package to be created and hence they need to create an issue in Jira for this. Just as above we have the problem that the product team can either create a new issue in the installation teams project (allowing the install team to find and manage the work) or they can create an issue in the Jira project for the product and assign it to the install team. With the former workflow it is easy for the install team to organize and manage it's team work but it is impossible for the product team to monitor and manage the results from that work. With the latter solution it is easy for the product team to monitor and track the state of their release but it is impossible to effectively manage the work, across products, for the installation team. It would be nice, for example, to be able to create a single task board for the install team which manages issues from many product-specific Jira projects. In this way the product teams can monitor and manage their release while still allowing the install team to manage and prioritize their work / backlog.
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Hello,

        I am keen to learn whether the people interested in GHS-1800 have used the Rapid Board. Please let me know via comments below.

        Thank you,
        Nicholas Muldoon

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Hello, I am keen to learn whether the people interested in GHS-1800 have used the Rapid Board. Please let me know via comments below. Thank you, Nicholas Muldoon
        Hide
        i Mark McDonald added a comment -

        @Nicholas - yes, I have. I think people supporting this request expect the equivalent of all the GreenHopper tools to be available across multiple projects, whereas the Rapid Board solves a slightly different problem. I use (and love) the Rapid Board for showing TODO/In Progress/Done boards when a business-project spans multiple technical systems (Jira-projects). What I was expecting from the Rapid Board was a cross-project planning board for myself to prioritise, schedule & plan with and also a cross-project task board that my team can use to see all of their work in one list.

        This is my experience anyway. YMMV!

        Show
        i Mark McDonald added a comment - @Nicholas - yes, I have. I think people supporting this request expect the equivalent of all the GreenHopper tools to be available across multiple projects, whereas the Rapid Board solves a slightly different problem. I use (and love) the Rapid Board for showing TODO/In Progress/Done boards when a business-project spans multiple technical systems (Jira-projects). What I was expecting from the Rapid Board was a cross-project planning board for myself to prioritise, schedule & plan with and also a cross-project task board that my team can use to see all of their work in one list. This is my experience anyway. YMMV!
        Hide
        bartosz.rakowski Bartosz Rakowski [RAKS Sp. z o.o.] added a comment -

        @Nicholas, we had not. We are waiting with the upgrade until GHS-1800 solves.

        Show
        bartosz.rakowski Bartosz Rakowski [RAKS Sp. z o.o.] added a comment - @Nicholas, we had not. We are waiting with the upgrade until GHS-1800 solves.
        Hide
        jorgenbakkeeriksen Jørgen Eriksen added a comment -

        Nicholas, the work on the Rapid Board looks very promising. I think you are at the very essence of the feature explained in GHS-1800:

        • cross project overview
        • cross project prioritizing

        And all this without (for now) interferring with the existing views (planning board, task board etc.) for those who only need single project views. I'm sure there is either need for changes in the planning and task board or giving the rapid board some needed functionality to support scrum projects. But developing the cross project view as a separate board seems like a good idea.

        My problem is that the global ranking demonstrated in the rapid board introduction video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRwp4WUJscY&feature=player_embedded) isn't working in my fresh 4.4 install. I've XML-imported a 4.2 database, that might be the problem? Or are there other prerequisites for this to work? I'm using scrum template. GHS-1800 is probably not the correct place for this feedback but I just wanted to make sure if the functionality actually is supposed to work now. Feel free to edit or move this part of the comment to some other place or issue.

        Show
        jorgenbakkeeriksen Jørgen Eriksen added a comment - Nicholas, the work on the Rapid Board looks very promising. I think you are at the very essence of the feature explained in GHS-1800 : cross project overview cross project prioritizing And all this without (for now) interferring with the existing views (planning board, task board etc.) for those who only need single project views. I'm sure there is either need for changes in the planning and task board or giving the rapid board some needed functionality to support scrum projects. But developing the cross project view as a separate board seems like a good idea. My problem is that the global ranking demonstrated in the rapid board introduction video ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRwp4WUJscY&feature=player_embedded ) isn't working in my fresh 4.4 install. I've XML-imported a 4.2 database, that might be the problem? Or are there other prerequisites for this to work? I'm using scrum template. GHS-1800 is probably not the correct place for this feedback but I just wanted to make sure if the functionality actually is supposed to work now. Feel free to edit or move this part of the comment to some other place or issue.
        Hide
        yoramhalberstam@michaelpage.com Yoram Halberstam added a comment -

        On the whole I like the cross project view. Slight issue, can we have multi-select selection's boxes for Projects and Releases so that we don't have to rewrite the query at every Sprint.In my organisation we handle different projects on the same Sprint because there is a single project manager with cross-project delivery every 2 weeks.

        Show
        yoramhalberstam@michaelpage.com Yoram Halberstam added a comment - On the whole I like the cross project view. Slight issue, can we have multi-select selection's boxes for Projects and Releases so that we don't have to rewrite the query at every Sprint.In my organisation we handle different projects on the same Sprint because there is a single project manager with cross-project delivery every 2 weeks.
        Hide
        clarkie Clarkie added a comment -

        We've only been using Jira + Greenhopper for a few months now and we're very pleased. The rapid board is probably the best enhancement that will help us improve our scheduling. A few issues/features/requests:

        1. the ranking in the planning board and rapid board work independently. I'm not sure if this is good or bad.
        2. I'd like to be able to choose an 'OR' rather than 'AND' for the quick filters at the top. We use these for each member of the team
        3. I'd like to be able to view an issue in Jira, not just edit, or customise the quick view.

        Apart from that I like it!

        Thanks

        Show
        clarkie Clarkie added a comment - We've only been using Jira + Greenhopper for a few months now and we're very pleased. The rapid board is probably the best enhancement that will help us improve our scheduling. A few issues/features/requests: the ranking in the planning board and rapid board work independently. I'm not sure if this is good or bad. I'd like to be able to choose an 'OR' rather than 'AND' for the quick filters at the top. We use these for each member of the team I'd like to be able to view an issue in Jira, not just edit, or customise the quick view. Apart from that I like it! Thanks
        Hide
        pitty2000 Pitty added a comment -

        A few requests for me:

        1. Write the JQL query direct in rapid board, removing the filter dependency.
        2. Customize the quick view, independently from screen configuration.
        Show
        pitty2000 Pitty added a comment - A few requests for me: Write the JQL query direct in rapid board, removing the filter dependency. Customize the quick view, independently from screen configuration.
        Hide
        gbrauer1 G B added a comment -

        I would be very excited about the Rapid Board but for GHS-3481. I just don't see how the Rapid Board could be usable without addressing that detail. However, if GHS-3481 was resolved, I would consider GHS-1800 resolved also.

        Show
        gbrauer1 G B added a comment - I would be very excited about the Rapid Board but for GHS-3481 . I just don't see how the Rapid Board could be usable without addressing that detail. However, if GHS-3481 was resolved, I would consider GHS-1800 resolved also.
        Hide
        aggelosp Aggelos Paraskevopoulos [Cententia] added a comment - - edited

        A couple more requests from me for the Rapid Board:

        1. Ability to copy, or save-as the "Rapid Views" GHS-3555
        2. Configurable issue detail view GHS-3557
        3. Configurable issue board card GHS-3557
        4. Make configurable the way cycle-time is calculated
        5. Would be nice to have the "Full Screen" (Projector Mode) option (now works only with the shortcut key)
        6. Custom Constraints GHS-3094

        Thanks

        Show
        aggelosp Aggelos Paraskevopoulos [Cententia] added a comment - - edited A couple more requests from me for the Rapid Board: Ability to copy, or save-as the "Rapid Views" GHS-3555 Configurable issue detail view GHS-3557 Configurable issue board card GHS-3557 Make configurable the way cycle-time is calculated Would be nice to have the "Full Screen" (Projector Mode) option (now works only with the shortcut key) Custom Constraints GHS-3094 Thanks
        Hide
        rollasoc Chris Rollason added a comment -

        We are currently evaluating Jira and greenhopper.

        I highly suspect that this is a deal breaker for us. I doubt we will have the go ahead to purchase, if we cannot to a scrum over multiple projects. Sorry!

        Show
        rollasoc Chris Rollason added a comment - We are currently evaluating Jira and greenhopper. I highly suspect that this is a deal breaker for us. I doubt we will have the go ahead to purchase, if we cannot to a scrum over multiple projects. Sorry!
        Hide
        jfoulquier Julien Foulquier added a comment -

        Hello,

        I'd like to get a quick update from Atlassian's guys about the RapidBoard ? Is it going to enter into the production branch soon ? Is the project dead or something ?

        ++

        Show
        jfoulquier Julien Foulquier added a comment - Hello, I'd like to get a quick update from Atlassian's guys about the RapidBoard ? Is it going to enter into the production branch soon ? Is the project dead or something ? ++
        Hide
        ryan@nmi.uk.com Ryan Brooks added a comment -

        @Julien Foulquier
        The Rapid Board is now available on GreenHopper if you're using JIRA 4.4 and GreenHopper 5.7.

        You just need to go into Administration->GreenHopper->General Configuration and select the Rapid Board option in "GreenHopper Labs" at the bottom of the page. You'll then get an extra option in the Agile menu for the Rapid Board.

        Although it's not perfect, the Rapid Board is a great improvement and has increased our reliance on JIRA/Greenhopper immensely. We're looking forward to future developments, so well done guys!

        Show
        ryan@nmi.uk.com Ryan Brooks added a comment - @Julien Foulquier The Rapid Board is now available on GreenHopper if you're using JIRA 4.4 and GreenHopper 5.7. You just need to go into Administration->GreenHopper->General Configuration and select the Rapid Board option in "GreenHopper Labs" at the bottom of the page. You'll then get an extra option in the Agile menu for the Rapid Board. Although it's not perfect, the Rapid Board is a great improvement and has increased our reliance on JIRA/Greenhopper immensely. We're looking forward to future developments, so well done guys!
        Hide
        jfoulquier Julien Foulquier added a comment -

        @Ryan
        Ok thanks, will look into it.

        Show
        jfoulquier Julien Foulquier added a comment - @Ryan Ok thanks, will look into it.
        Hide
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment -

        Isn't the date at the top in "Atlassian Status as at April 6 2011" completely wrong? The post announcing Greenhopper 5.8 it references (http://blogs.atlassian.com/jira/2011/10/greenhopper-58-available-rapid-board-kanban.html) is dated October 18 2011, so shouldn't the headline of this thread read "Atlassian Status as at October 18 2011" (or later)?

        Show
        brusselsshrek Hugh added a comment - Isn't the date at the top in "Atlassian Status as at April 6 2011" completely wrong? The post announcing Greenhopper 5.8 it references ( http://blogs.atlassian.com/jira/2011/10/greenhopper-58-available-rapid-board-kanban.html ) is dated October 18 2011, so shouldn't the headline of this thread read "Atlassian Status as at October 18 2011" (or later)?
        Hide
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment -

        Thanks for pointing out the incorrect date in Atlassian Status, updated.

        Show
        nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian] added a comment - Thanks for pointing out the incorrect date in Atlassian Status, updated.

          People

          • Assignee:
            Unassigned
            Reporter:
            nmuldoon Nicholas Muldoon [Atlassian]
          • Votes:
            258 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            231 Start watching this issue

            Dates

            • Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: