Thanks @attila!  I'll take a look

@Shilpa Nicodemus You can also give this app a chance: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1220785/epic-roadmap-for-jira-software?hosting=datacenter&tab=overview

Here are my notes.  I hesitate to be so transparent on my evaluation, so take it with a grain of salt that I had to evaluate fairly quickly (only spent a few hours each testing out the first two) and the requirements are very specific to my org.  

96f1f9119d82 did you ever look into any plugins? If you have any suggestions or user feedback on these please share  

We have Structure.Gantt. Structure.Gantt requires the full Structure plugin to be installed as well.   We already had the Structure plug-in installed.  Structure is one of our most used and loved plug-ins.

It was a real plus adding Structure.Gantt for project and resource management .  It has better resource management than Advanced Roadmaps.  We discontinued our Advanced Roadmap licenses because we could do so much more with Structure.Gantt.

At this point, I'm just going to go in the direction of using a plugin.  Does anyone use any of these? 

• [Easy Agile Roadmaps for Jira | Atlassian Marketplace|https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1215695/easy-agile-roadmaps-for-jira?hosting=server&tab=overview]
• [Agile User Story Map & Product Roadmap for Jira | Atlassian Marketplace|https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1222309/agile-user-story-map-product-roadmap-for-jira?hosting=server&tab=overview]
• [Aha! roadmaps for Jira | Atlassian Marketplace|https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1211698/aha-roadmaps-for-jira?hosting=server&tab=overview]
• [Structure.Gantt - Planning at Scale | Atlassian Marketplace|https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1217809/structure-gantt-planning-at-scale?hosting=server&tab=overview]
• Something else?

+1

@Brian Hair, which is understandable, however the cost for datacenter is still double the cost of the server instance. They cut costs by discontinuing support on an entire branch and force people to migrate to datacenter at a higher cost while they won't use most of the advantages for datacenter which are mostly to support high availability. But you are right for us the datacenter would be a possibility, but since the cost doubles we wouldn't be able to purchase this within our framework contract due to government laws on acquisition and fair competition. so we need to go back on the market and allow all company's who subscribe to the gunning to compete for the contract, and I'm sure that Atlassian hasn't got such a good chance of winning at there current pricing at this point.

@Mark Dorsi, there are numerous reasons, the main reasons for us are less control about data security since we are a public service, dependability on internet instead of intranet, vendor lock-in, limited integration, extra steps in troubleshooting by external companies, no guaranty on a good support level, bigger chance to be hacked since cloud providers are interesting targets, higher recurrent costs, no control on reliability, no internal knowledge building ...

Above issues are the reason why we do not allow any cloud based SaaS solutions as a rule in our company unless there is no other alternative. 

Timo Theunkens - They will still have the Datacenter product which you host on-premise and not in the cloud. You are not required to move to cloud with this change. We are planning to go datacenter ourselves for similar reasons.

Just don't think they want to maintain two different on-premise solutions, server and datacenter.

Roadmaps are in the datacenter version as well.

I guess it's not being considered because Jira wants to get rid of its server version. They only want to focus on the cloud solution and will stop support on the server implementation soon. For us this means we will need to look for a new software solution, as a government we are not allowed to use cloud based systems since we need to maintain full ownership of all data in our systems we can only buy on prem solutions. You can read more about this here:

https://www.atlassian.com/blog/announcements/journey-to-cloud

I was not amused by this single sided viewpoint since I believe it is driven by greed.

Even in the current pricing model where the maintenance cost for Jira server has become higher we would pay three times more when switching to the Jira cloud. I hope in the near future we can develope our own ticketing and project management platform so we do not need to rely on companies like Atlassian in the future who strengthen there market position and then force there customers into a solution they do not want and never would have even considered.

+1

Why aren't roadmaps being considered? This is a key feature.

Thank you,

Mark

It is not being considered.

Is there any update about the roadmap feature? 

thanks 

Hey @Saurabh, in Q1 JDC is getting Advanced Roadmaps: https://www.atlassian.com/roadmap/data-center?enterprise=added-value

If I'm not mistaken, that's similar/the same as the cloud Roadmap offering.

Is there basic roadmap option available in DC as shown in advertisement for cloud?

New functionality included in Data Center: The following Atlassian-built apps and new functionality will be included with a Data Center subscription:

• Jira Software Data Center: Advanced Roadmaps (formerly Portfolio for Jira)
• Confluence Data Center: Team Calendars for Confluence, Analytics for Confluence
• Jira Service Desk Data Center: Insight - Asset Management, Insight Discovery

Seems it will come bundle moving forward with DC

Perhaps unsurprisingly, Atlassian has announced that the Server version of their software is being phased out (no new licenses from 2/2/21, no renewals from 2/2/24). Only Data Center or Cloud to remain.

I think that Atlassian will stop developing for Jira server (on premisses) and focus only in Cloud. 

I only bought Jira because of the roadmap. I'm very disappointed.

When I looked at the descriprion of Jira Software and went to the Roadmap page - I was sure, that we would get those functions. https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/features/roadmaps There is no clear information that this is for "Jira Software Cloud" only.

That's a kind of unfair advertising, I think.
I hope, those features will be added to the Server Edition and Atlassian will make the description of their applications clear.

P.S. We paid for 250 licenses for Jira and 100 licenses for Confluence...

It's clear Jira really needs some stronger competition. It's barely more than a different view over the same data, but it's so important it should be bundled with every Jira instance. Portfolio must be paid for for all users, even if only a select few need the features, which quickly makes it extremely expensive. 

As the other comments, I don't understand why this feature is not implemented on Jira Server.

Is it because of a technical limitations (Jira server is running with only a tomcat/pgsql, as next-gen projects for Jira Cloud maybe require new stacks like serverless, cloud vendor locked-in services, and/or docker/kubernetes ?). For the last one, hey guys, we also can manage to deploy helm charts... 

Is it because as Microsoft does with Office, main objective is to have all customers migrated to Jira Cloud, so in a few months, no new features will be added ?

Anyway, Atlassian, there are still customers that chose to keep Jira on-premise, whatever the (good or not) reason is.  It would be great to make it clear, once for all, because when we see that "next-gen" stuff is only available on Cloud, the message you are sending to your customers is very bad... 

Thanks for clarification, it seems that a lot of people would be glad to hearing from you on this topic.

by not including the roadmap feature in Jira server, Atlassian is driving away customers.

the advanced roadmap plugin is barely useful.

Jira Cloud is not suitable for our enterprise and thus we require Jira Server. The roadmap feature included in the next-gen project type is an essential project management feature. Without this feature, we are forced to use spreadsheets or pay additional fees for apps in the marketplace that never seem to work as well as the native built-in functionality. The roadmap feature is offered free of charge on the free cloud version of Jira software, it would be great if the same were true for those of us using the paid Jira Server.

the roadmap functionality is an essential feature for project management; it should be available in the server version.

I agree with the comments above, I also cannot understand why this feature does not exist in the server version.

Why this feature isn't on the server yet? Seems like a joke!

Our company offers financial services. We are subject to very high standards on data protection and security. These almost do not allow cloud solutions.

Cloud is not an option for our enterprise.

Me too...

For me and our enterprise is cloud no option. I follow the arguments here in the comments.

I couldn’t agree more with you. They should rebrand Jira software & cloud since they no longer are even close to each other 

I don't understand, what game you are playing, Atlassian.

We pay a lot of money ( and more and more each year) for Jira server. And for this money I expect you delivering features.

be fair!

And for our enterprise: cloud is no option. full stop.

Please close the huge gaps between Jira Server and Cloud. You are selling Jira Server by advertising with the Cloud version features, in which a lot will not be available.

At least, we need the simplified user interfaces for the Jira server, the same one on the Cloud.

Our company started using another intergrate-able tool for roadmap planning some months ago…

Please add this feature  to Jira Server.

Please make it available for Jira Server!!!

we have a multiple team and using a 250 user license and it would help so much our PM and managers to have that Roadmap features!!!

Jira Server please.

Yes, interested in Data Center access to advanced road maps!

It is ridiculous that enterprise server clients cannot expect the same features as the cloud version. It simply isn't feasible for certain enterprises, especially those dealing with healthcare data, to migrate to the cloud product.

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, Jira Portfolios sounds like a decent alternative, but it's disheartening that the cloud version of Jira gets this feature as an integrated part of the product, while the server version has to pay an extra licensing fee for it.  It's a bit frustrating from a customer standpoint.

Would be great to have this feature in the server version of the product. Our teams are crying out for something like this.

Atlassian hears their customers loud and clear and have provided their answers. If you want roadmap functionality in Jira Server you have 5 options: (in order of preference by Atlassian)

1. Purchase Jira Align
2. Migrate to Jira Cloud
3. Purchase an addon
4. Manually create your roadmaps in Confluence/Visio/Powerpoint/dirt and stop adding comments to suggestions not being considered
5. Migrate to a competitor

Yes, that is unfair that only one should have and not the other - Cloud version vs Server. Since Roadmap feature is most wanted and valuable for Portfolio scheme of projects and most large companies run on Hosted/Server versions, it doesn't make sense to not consider the plea.

The fact that is not being considered makes me seriously question whether Jira Server even has a future. Next-gen projects are the future on Jira Cloud, and if they're not being considered on Server, then it seems like Server is being relegated to the status of a legacy product that is not getting major new features.

This is not even under Future Consideration.  If this core feature is not added to Jira Server, then it's clear that Atlassian has two very divergent paths for its cloud and server roadmap.  Often when that happens, one of the products will wither on the vine, and in this case, it won't be the cloud product.  It's time to start looking for an alternative and be prepared to migrate.

This feature is needed in the server version of the product. 

The price-per-user on cloud (premium) is on par with self-hosted right now. I don't see how adding a feature they already have in the cloud version could justify double the price.  If you don't have the option of putting all of our data in the cloud, Atlassian starts making less and less sense as a solution. Last I knew, you also couldn't customize your URL for the cloud version either, you're stuck with an Atlassian URL.  I'm keeping my eye on YouTrack this year, they are adding Help desk/Service Desk integration, they could be a viable alternative. From what I understand they seem to keep both cloud and stand-alone versions in sync as well (at significantly less money I might add).

@benjamin, I think you are missing the point - that Atlassian should have a vested interest in keeping the product in sync on both cloud and server premises. The early promise from Atlassian to keep these products more or less in sync to cater for the fact, that not all companies can or may place their data in the cloud. We invested in Atlassian from an early time and we belong to those who gladly participated in evangelizing the products. We are now forced to admit we are going nowhere and alternative solutions non-Atlassian are on the table. 

attila.bordas, can you please ask Atlassian to buy your company and integrate that directly into Jira?   Looks good! 

@attila.bordas While I appreciate your efforts, it is still galling that we have to pay for yet another feature on top of the already steep licensing fees.

@Vladimir: The developer community listened.  We've created an app for Jira Software Server with similar functionality if you need just that feature set. It's pretty basic right now but we'll improve it with time.

"NOT BEING CONSIDERED
Whilst we appreciate the potential impact and value this issue may bring to our customers, we will not be working on it in the foreseeable future. We will review this ticket in a year to see if our decision has changed."

Somebody from development community should really CONSIDER building this plugin/add-on/app  or maybe wait for a year.

The agile way of doing things.

+1 

Please add proper roadmap feature to the best version of Jira- Jira Software Server.

I believe most people commenting here are paying customers or at least work for a paying customer. We are a paying customer. The way such a functionality is only added to cloud and server ignored is shameful.

Please do the right thing and listen to Your users Atlassian.

+1 such a shame to get feature on one side and not on the other (server) !

It is just deplorable Atlassian. Your arrogance on this is beginning to be your hallmark feature. Our internal support as managers to continue advocating using Jira are dwindling. 

We may not and thus can not port to the cloud for security reasons and cost reasons. To date we have been heard as managers and advocates on holding out for this so much asked for feature but we have just lost to upper management, Microsoft and their sad and complex Sharepoint environment. It is hugely demotivating.

I don't usually get angry but this is where I am now with you Atlassian.

If you don't want us to buy into Atlassian then at least be honest and scrap Server.  Either way you loose Server customers and we loose.

How come that a project management tool like Jira Software (Server) does not have a graphical display of the project process???

Furthermore it is absolutely unfair, that for Cloud there is one, and it should even get better in 2020 s. https://www.atlassian.com/blog/jira-software/next-gen-roadmap-updates

This feature is definitely worth considering in near future!

Roadmaps, finally, much excited, cloud only, wait! what?

Atlassian reconsider considering this at least 

https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-Software-questions/ETA-of-Roadmap-for-Jira-Server/qaq-p/900744

Andy Heinzer said you gather interest, it seems to me there is a lot of it...

I just read this article today and was very excited about using this feature...

https://sdtimes.com/softwaredev/atlassian-updates-jira-with-new-roadmap-capabilities/

Turns out a little searching and I landed on this issue, and the features doesn't exist in Server. Wat?!?

This is the 15th most voted and 15th most watched issue for Server and has been at approx that ranking for a really long time. Atlassian team, please revisit this issue - it's clearly in demand - and people are still commenting even after you changed the status to not being considered.

Please listen to what your significant Server user base wants.

1+ more for @Rob Tucker.  Include the roadmap in the server version!

+100 we currently need to use plugins which are slow and costly rather than using something which is part of the feature set. Would love to see this being added to Server so that we can manage our complex projects in a more visual way like many other products. We can't move to cloud for security reasons and it is very frustrating that we can't get features like this on server.

+10

We are in the same boat, +1 @gavin_baker

I would love to use a road mapping tool built into our Jira instance, but we already pay a significant amount of money per year to Atlassian and needed to add multiple plug-ins to fill in for features that seem like they should be included.  When we were finishing up our implementation it felt like we would be nickel-and-dimed for all of the features we wanted.  At this point, it would be more cost-effective for us to purchase another solution because we don't need it for all of our users, only a handful of them that use Jira.

1+ for @garvin_baker!!!
for us it is no option to change to the cloud solution. So I would totally apreciate to have the new features also on server version! I do not understand why Atlassian makes that so difficult. 

I also second you @gavin_baker !

@gavin_baker I totally second that, and our user count is much higher.

David, due to the nature of our project and regulatory requirements of our industry, we have to host these services on premises. We have a 50 user license, but only maybe 2 or 3 staff would need to create roadmaps. Yet we would have to spend thousands of dollars on the Portfolio license for all 50 users, which we could get for free if using the Cloud edition.

The alternative is to use a 3rd party solution, which is far from ideal, and also potentially very expensive.

The harsh distinctions between Jira Cloud and Server are not made clear on the product webpage, and the gap in features (and the rationale for the bifurcation!) is confusing and frustrating for users.

So I would like to echo the sentiments of many of my fellow users above who face a similar dilemma. Any non-trivial project is going to need some form of roadmap planning, and the story for Server customers is far from ideal.

What Jeff said 

But to be honest, if Jira Cloud Roadmap is only available for simplified projects, that still doesn't really help a pretty big chunk of the users. In our company most of the projects (around 1000) use customized WF with 8-10 statuses, so we can't use Atlassian roadmap anyway.

I totally understand Atlassian too, why bother, when they can collect % from partners doing addons (its a win-win). Lets wait for another price hike or two, there will definitely be something more accommodating on the market by then 

@david

As said many time we keep revisiting the same issues and I say ISSUES as in my mind it is why many dont want to use Jira as they dont listen to what actual users want, change screens at the drop of a hat and assume that what "they" think is correct and the best solution.

As others have said many of us are on servers but then when we do move into the cloud, we have an unworkable solution for our workplace processes, so managment start looking at other options rather than Jira.

I wont get started on the testing add on that has now made the tests unusable as have to open so many tabs on the supposed NEW BETTER version but more like WORSE

Server users want Roadmaps so please ask the royal "we" at Atlassian actually fix issues that we have before introducing solutions that are not workable for many.

Allowing anyone to add projects as the expected option was a major miss at our company

David, thank you for your diligence in following up on this issue.  I can't speak for all your customers, but my sample set has 100% demand.  Put simply, the only Jira customers that I've worked with have had two characteristics:

1. They have Jira Server.
2. They want roadmap capability, and have gone outside Atlassian to get it.

The first customer (where I coached 6 teams) built their own in-house solution that pretty much does the same thing as Roadmap.  It's a pretty slick solution, and I wish I could take it everywhere with me, but it was an in-house effort.

The second customer (where I currently coach dozens of teams) the pilot department for agile is using Agile Central / Rally for roadmap capability, together with Jira for the teams.  To be clear, this configuration is a pain.  If Roadmap were available on premise, I'd advise them to switch to Jira end-to-end.  Guess who loses? 

Every week, our coaches team gets questions on the planning question.  If it requires a calendar view, Jira fails to deliver.  Can't do a calendar-based sprint planning for coordination of dependencies.  Can't do a calendar-based roadmap planning or coordination of releases.  Can't find a way to plot any of the date fields on a calendar or Gantt-style chart, even in forecast mindset. 

By the way, have you read the book about a company that gets thousands of unsolicited comments saying people love their product?  The company's name is Aha!  ** Guess what functionality they supply to customers that they love so much.  Spoiler: it's simple and easy-to-use agile roadmaps.

Thanks again to everyone for the continued feedback. I just think it's worth setting expectations of my role within Atlassian - I'm a team leader for Portfolio for Jira Server, so my particular interest was in why people wanted the Cloud Next-Gen Project Roadmap feature over what we were offering in Portfolio - especially to see if we were still falling short with regards to major changes to the user interface that we released in version 3.0. I'm not in a position to change the decision that has been made, however I will continue to pass the feedback onto the relevant people in Atlassian.

I think the concerns raised about marketing and documentation are particularly valid as a source of confusion with regards to understanding what features are available on each platform. 

It's worth remembering that although it might appear as though the entire server user base wants roadmaps, that perception is probably derived from just the comments on this issue. There are many customers happily using Portfolio and/or Jira Align or have no need/desire for roadmaps at all. The comments in this issue are not representative of all server users, just those that want the Cloud roadmap feature available to them on Server.

Not being considered – seriously?

As an agile coach, this makes it difficult for me to recommend Jira for my customers moving from agile transformation at the team level toward end-to-end organization transformation. Agile transformation is often enhanced by adjacent solutions – simple advances like adding Roadmap capability, without the intense monolithic overhead of Portfolio.

@David, the assumption that there will be feature parity between server based solutions and cloud based solutions has been set by industry leaders like Microsoft. There is a reason they are industry leaders. "Cloud first" for them does not mean "cloud only".

By the way, the kind of protect-the-monolith decision-making Atlassian is demonstrating right now is similar to what Microsoft did around the year 2000. It's why they stumbled in responding to the competitive forces of Java and Apple. I was a Microsoft MVP (developer) at the time, and the MVP community warned Microsoft of the gap they were creating between their smaller customers and enterprise customers in their features and licensing scheme for small-to-medium teams using Visual Studio, opening the door for open source to capture that market. They didn't listen to their most ardent fans. (This thread feels familiar.) The lack of Roadmap functionality isolates the Lean Startup minded teams and departments using Jira within large compliance-heavy organizations from making the next natural step in their agile roadmap.  Fortunately for Microsoft and their customers, they recovered their senses in time to catch the cloud wave. Atlassian, you may be making that mistake with Jira today, and I hope you recover quickly. If you can't understand what I mean, it's not a good sign.

(Note: this is my personal advice and opinion, independent of any official position of my employer or clients.)

@David, it's clear that your entire user base utilizing the server version is looking for Roadmaps, we can keep going on debating this topic for another year and collecting so-called feedback but to what avail? This topic has been discussed for at least 9 months now with absolutely no positive outlook from Atlassian in regards to providing such a simple feature. Could you please explain the hesitation?

We keep going in circles around the same three topics:

1. Server users want Roadmaps
2. Server users not interested in Portfolio as it's an overkill (also item 3 applies here)
3. License structure on server is not suitable for big data centers with a large user base, so plugins similar to Roadmaps can't be utilized

It's unfortunate that most of us can't switch to the cloud version due to many restrictions surrounding audits and data security. And from the look of it, even if Atlassian starts the planning phase now for such a feature it would take at least another year or two to make it available to server users.

@David, the assumption comes from how Jira software is advertised. Jira cloud and server are presented on Atlassian's web-site as really a single product with two different deployment options. Most of the product information is presented without any distinction between cloud and server. It's only once you begin to dig deep in the documentation that you become aware of any differences other than how it's hosted, and even then, there aren't any readily-available comparisons of features. Roadmaps are even advertised as one of the primary features for Jira software in general on this page: https://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/features

If these really are different products with different feature-sets, I think Atlassian should make a clear distinction in marketing materials about the differences between them.

@David, Setting the rest of this aside, one great example of where the expected parity may be formed is by going through the documentation. Half of the time, the default page version is Cloud, so users will expect that feature to exist. As a Data Center user, I've had this come up with:

• Road maps
• Agile/Scrum Issue types (i.e. Initiatives, Themes, etc., particularly as they are shown on the Agile Coach pages)
• Some other guides where showing users how to do things aren't consistent. I realize there was a major UI design to Cloud somewhat recently, so I constantly get users asking where that UI is or why information isn't framed certain ways.

That being said, we are currently 'piloting' Portfolio for Jira. It seems to be really useful for a very small subset of our company's user base. (at least currently). I anticipate it will grow, but it really is overkill for many teams that aren't running yet running large-scale Agile or have industry-required processes that make Portfolio not a great fit. I don't think it 'helps' that the documentation for Jira Cloud's roadmaps make it seem significantly simpler to use for most teams than Porfolio does. To the uninitiated, Portfolio for Jira really is an intimidating package.

I genuinely appreciate the ongoing feedback from everyone. I can't really comment on pricing or licensing as that is not something I'm involved with.

However, I think it's worth addressing the assumption that there has to be feature parity between Jira in Cloud and Server. I'd be interested to know where this assumption comes from? The reality is that the different product offerings have different objectives and features that are developed for Cloud may not be available for Server. 

I also think it's worth highlighting that roadmaps are only available in next-gen Cloud projects (so depending on what project type you use in Cloud you still might not be able to use them).

Whilst none of the above directly addresses the request, hopefully it at least helps to clarify the rationale behind the decision.

+1 to Joe and Matt

Very disappointed that Jira Team can't do more to help with this much needed feature.

I think the key point here is that this feature already exists for Jira Cloud. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that Jira Server will have feature parity with the Cloud offering, even if new features come to Server later.

If Atlassian isn't interested in giving the same level of support for its Server customers that it does for Cloud, I imagine many people who are unable to use Cloud will look elsewhere.

Matt (comment above) and others hit the nail on the head. Biggest deterrent is the absurd pricing structure of all Jira plugins. Why can't you all figure out a better way to license products and addons so that customers pay for only the subset of users that need them instead of the entire user base. We are now in the process of finding products outside of Jira to help us manage our roadmaps which is very inconvenient and disappointing.

Agreed that Price seems to be the biggest deterrent to using portfolio. It is our reason we stopped using it when we had to upgrade our license and why I started following this thread.

I would estimate that Portfolio is used by 10% of the total user base that is licensed in most organizations but its priced at 40-50% of the base Jira cost.  

Significantly reducing the cost of portfolio would be a compromise because it isn't the ideal solution and teams need basic roadmap support but aren't willing to pay the full price for portfolio.

If I could license portfolio for 10% of my Jira user base at a significant discount, I would do that as well. 

Too bad there is no way to +1 a comment in Jira. I'm curious if other teams would agree to this. 

Thanks for the reply David, but a big part of the frustration is that nothing is being done to address the actual issues identified by your feedback request:

1. Many customers would like a roadmap but it's far too expensive to purchase Portfolio for that one feature
2. Many (presumably the same) customers cannot move to cloud for a variety of reasons

The simple answer given was "buy this expensive thing you already said you don't need/can't afford". This is where the frustration lies. You asked for feedback, we gave it, the follow up advice didn't address the issues.

Everyone understands that you can't implement every feature, but this is a standard feature of your cloud offering, and some parity in your offerings does not seems like an unreasonable request.

ronald.sietzema - I can understand your frustration with this, but the reason for asking for the feedback was to understand if the people voting for this request were aware of Portfolio for Jira (...and if they were, why they weren't using it). If the problem was a lack of awareness of Portfolio then that would have been something that we could have easily addressed - it sounds like awareness isn't the problem, but we wouldn't have known without asking.

The feedback provided is taken seriously and is valued but that doesn't necessarily mean that every request will be implemented.

...why ask for user feedback, if you kill the idea anyway? 

doesn't feel like the comments here are been taken seriously...

...this is very disappointing and you are playing the cards right into the hands of the people in our organisation that want Sharepoint instead. You are not helping us who wants to work with Confluence and Jira and ensure even more and - and we may only have a on-premises solution.

Your choice to let Cloud and Server diverge to this extent is a big mistake from our point of view. And breaking the promise we started out with years and years ago.

That said, we strongly encourage you to check out our latest Portfolio for Jira Server and Data Center 3.0 platform release. In it, we have completely reimagined Portfolio to make it more simple and intuitive to use, flexible to your planning style and process, and transparent for all users. We think you'll like what you see.

Funny. People gave you a good amount of reasons on why they will not switch to Portfolio and you recommend it again. 

AFTER Atlassian Open is through.

Well, that's disappointing.

Wow. So one of the hottest, most voted and watched Jira Server feature requests just gets a 'No, buy our other incredibly expensive product' instead. Seems the extensive feedback everyone gave was simply ignored, which begs the question of why keep asking for it?

As mentioned before, many organisations are unable to go down the cloud route or have invested heavily in server products, and therefore are essentially punished with huge extra costs for a ton of features they don't need, just to use a feature that they do. 

I came back from Atlassian Open feeling energised that Atlassian listens to its user base across all products and provides for them. The response here would tend to indicate otherwise - perhaps it's simply true that Atlassian are moving away from server products.

Apologies for the passive-aggressive tone of this message, but this is an incredibly disappointing outcome - which at least 367 of your customers would presumably agree with.

Proper marketplace link: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/search?product=jira&query=roadmap

Hi Jakub,

This is not making sense. It seems we are being pushed to buy portfolio just to have a roadmap feature.

We have a licence on 10,000 users in Jira and we did try portfolio and no one liked that. It is an overhead to Jira and also very expensive.

Please respect your loyal customers and compete with other applications in market. I am fighting on daily basis to keep Jira as major agile tools and not getting users to switch to better UI tools like DevOps Azure. If we are making an effort to keep your application sellable then Jira team should also provide good feature so that it can fulfil user requirements and keep their experience about the application at the best.

Hello everyone,

First of all, thank you for sharing with us that you like the roadmaps feature in Jira Cloud. We love it too!

As of today, the roadmaps feature is only available for the next-gen project type in Jira Software Cloud. We do not have plans to bring the roadmaps feature or next-gen project type from Jira Cloud to Jira Server or Jira Data Center.

Atlassian's Cloud and Self-hosted product offerings are developed independently, which allows us to make the best prioritization decisions for each set of customers. For the self-hosted versions of Jira, this meant taking a different approach involving supporting more advanced planing, cross-project dependency management, capacity planning and global releases. All of which require a specialized tool - Portfolio for Jira Server and Data Center.

While we are not committed to building out new roadmapping capabilities directly within Jira Server or Data Center, our team is working closely with the Portfolio for Jira team to improve the overlapping functionality of these offerings.

That said, we strongly encourage you to check out our latest Portfolio for Jira Server and Data Center 3.0 platform release. In it, we have completely reimagined Portfolio to make it more simple and intuitive to use, flexible to your planning style and process, and transparent for all users. We think you'll like what you see.

Alternatively, we suggest you to check out the Atlassian Marketplace for other solutions to meet your needs.

To learn more about our recent investments in Jira Server and Data Center, please check out our dashboards showing Recently resolved issues and Current work and future plans.

Best regards,
The Jira Server and Data Center Team

Hi David

We had two concurrent instances of our Atlassian products (Confluence/JIRA), both cloud and server. The server instance was initially the primary resource for our German/European offices but last year we spent considerable time/effort/money migrating everything over, as we wanted to consolidate and cloud simply didn't fit the bill (no choice of data location, little to no enterprise level features, unsuitable SSO, huge cost per user).

Frankly, if we'd known that many of those various features were to be implemented or issues solved within the year it would likely have influenced our decision but we are where we are. This obviously means that we are very much invested in server and will be for a several years, so moving back to cloud is unfeasible at this time.

Additionally, a (perceived if not actual) lack of transparency on the future of server products does not help, and makes decisions on the technological landscape within our business more difficult.

Thanks
Joe

Hi David, 

I have tried to implement Portfolio (2.0), but the most management teams choose Structure.Gantt, because it was simpel, a one view solution, where you see hierarchy, timeline, resources and capacity, these are the basics for implementing SAFe. Other teams and smaler departments even wanted it more simpel solutions, they use a variety of solutions; StoryMapping (easy agile), just a Kanban board with epics or confluence page with roadmap functions. 

To me its just 'Ease of use' over 'functionality' that kills Portfolio. A roadmap feature needs to be 'sold' to the Business not Development, if it were up to the dev site, we would have implemented it. 

Our program is in the defense industry and therefore requires an on-premises solution. No government customer I'm aware of has ever been ok with hosting proprietary program data on external servers. I don't see this changing. However it is worth pointing out Amazon is jumping through some amazing hoops attempting to get access to this customer base by setting up what they call GovCloud. https://aws.amazon.com/govcloud-us/

What Benjamin said is probably a valid argument for at least 50% of current Jira server customers, if not even more.

We all customized the solution so it suits our needs with different add-ons and apps, plus integrations with other systems. Going backwards with cloud is not really an option 

I can imagine though, smaller teams not using complex processes are enjoying their lives on Cloud with almost 0 worries.

@David Draper : We were thinking about moving our stuff to the Cloud next year. the hurdles were:

• Two Apps we currently use a lot would have to be migrated to a new solution, because they are not available in the Cloud
• Migration of Jira (either to the Cloud or merging two instances) is hell if you have a good bunch of Apps using their own AO tables
• GDPR - Atlassian struggled a bit with that. I somewhere lost track if they made their Cloud offerings GDPR compliant
• The move to the Cloud would have to be accompanied with moving our user base or integrating them with Atlassian Access to still have our Company 2FA available -> additional cost for something I have set up completely on premise. 
• All links, filters, etc. in Confluence and Jira have to be adopted. And it won't matter if I move just Jira into the Cloud or add Bitbucket and Confluence as well. I have to script around that
• And again: pricing. With Atlassians new prices I'd have to pay 4 times of what we currently pay for our (mostly maintained) Server licenses. 5$/User might seem cheap when you directly compare that to other vendors. But what makes Jira special is that I can expand it with the Apps I need to customize it, while all of those Apps are still in the standard. I don't have to code myself the screens or the reports I need, when I can just get them from the marketplace. 
  With the new Cloud pricing scheme, I simply can't just put some Apps in and still run on a competitive price. I lose a lot of flexibility there. Especially since even Jira Cloud lacks some basic functionality that's been requested for years now. I still have to work around that using Apps. 
  We are currently running a Jira Server with 1900 Users including Portfolio (and yes, it's Overkill for what we actually do with it),  and about 10-15 user installed Apps. We are able to restore lost data to the minute in case of emergency and so on. Including all work and support we deliver, we are able to do support that for 5€/User. In Jira Cloud we'd have to go for 20€/User. To be fair: in part this is because the monthly pricing of App vendors in Atlassian Cloud is insane, too. 

Thanks to everyone that has replied so far to my question - I appreciate the responses, keep them coming please!

The feedback so far mostly suggests an unwillingness to pay for Portfolio in addition to Jira (in some cases because Portfolio offers more functionality than is needed). It would also be useful to understand the reasons for not migrating to Jira Cloud in order to have access the roadmap features if Portfolio is too expensive/too complex?

For our org we took a deep dive on Portfolio and ran a trial internally (however this was Portfolio 2.x not 3.x). The overwhelming feedback was that Portofolio was 1) too complex and "fiddly" 2) imposed a level of rigor that teams were unable or not willing to adopt 3) imposed a methodology and approach teams were unable or not willing to adopt.

The teams were looking for something that would help with quarterly roadmap planning that integrated well with Jira. In short we were looking for something like the Jira Cloud roadmap tool but Portfolio was like MS Project.

For now we've settled on 1) Easy Agile Roadmaps (3rd party plugin) and 2) Contorting Scrum/Kanban boards into quarterly planning tools using clever queries and labels.