Would have voted too. Very disappointing - would have expected better from Atlassian given that I've had to downgrade a recently bought 100 license upgrade down to our 50 license because of conflicts. The additional user licensing isn't clear on the Atlassian site and the pricing for 100 additional users of $2,900 should include Greenhopper given that a 50 user JIRA+Greenhopper license is $3,000. This means the 100 user upgrade and the original license total up to $6,200 and means I can no longer use Greenhopper! Whereas a new 100 user license for JIRA+Greenhopper is $6,000. Maybe I missed something simple...but this doesn't make sense at all.

I would have voted on this if it was not closed. We only want to use/start with greenhopper on a small part of our company.

Surely you don't expect me to purchase Greenhopper licenses for my non developers, such as sales and support? It's not really about the money, its the principal of the matter.

This is very unfortunate. Greenhopper will not be an option for us then. Please reconsider decoupling GreenHopper from JIRA licensing.

Commenting to agree that this a deal breaker for us, too. We have a 100 user JIRA license and like the commenters above most of our users are non-technical and wouldn't go near GH. But we have a small core of developers working agile that would find it extremely useful. As it is, we're going to end up de-coupling the agile work from our existing Atlassian infrastructure, because there's no way management is going to pay thousands for a tool used by a handful of people.

Another voice to decouple the licensing. We have an enterprise license for JIRA, as we have 75 users and growing quickly. We use JIRA for bug tracking, project planning, Operations and IT ticketing. We have three people that use greenhopper; the Dev manager, a release manager and a project manager.

The enterprise greenhopper license required for those three people is very difficult for senior management to swallow. So now we are looking at alternatives in use in other divisions of the company that cost upwards of $500 per seat, but it is seen as a cost savings over GreenHopper. And its a completely different decoupled tool, so who knows if that is a path away from Jira and Confluence altogether.

All said above. Pls decouple Greenhopper from JIRA !!!

We are in the same situation. Jira is used company wide by 100-150 users for a wide range of operational and support uses. The vast majority (~80%) of our users use the full range of core Jira in this way.

Greenhopper is only relevant to our engineering team of about 25 individuals but we have to pay license fees as if all our users are using it when 80% of the company would go nowhere near it.

The workaround of deploying a second Jira instance just for those using Greenhopper is not acceptable since it removes the much appreciated flexibility we get from having the whole company on the same system.

Greenhopper functionally acknowledges the fact that not all users will use it by having a top level configuration to only switch it on for certain Jira projects (i.e. teams). The licensing model should reflect this as well.

This issue should be re-considered, we are also in the same boat. Not all jira users are involved in projects ( we use jira for more than tracking software issues ) and they do not need greenhopper access.

I am sorry to hear you have reached this conclusion.

We were seriously considering purchasing Greenhopper, but this (imho strange) licensing policy precludes any such consideration. As the majority of users for us will be external customers with no need for Greenhopper, investing in Greenhopper would be like throwing money out the window.

I do hope you realize this is hurting the sales of Greenhopper.