It does https://jira.atlassian.com/projects/JSWCLOUD/issues/JSWCLOUD...

Makes me really appreciate my setup of:

- GitHub for source control

- AppVeyor for CI

- BlazeMeter for Load Testing

- Google Cloud for Cloud Hosting

- Slack for Team Chat

- MyGet for private NuGet feeds

- Trello for task management

- ELK cloud for log management

Yes it is many different services, but as a small team I like that we can pick the best tool for the job instead of trying to find a hammer for all nails which doesn't exist.

It also makes us less worried about changes, because we are not invested in any vendor so much that if they do something which makes our lives too difficult that we couldn't easily move on elsewhere.

Also it forces us to design our software in such a way that we don't lock ourselves into a specific vendor. For example we would have all our builds scripted instead of configured via some GUIs with the configuration stored on some vendor's cloud. The build script runs from anywhere. We can run our builds on Azure DevOps, TravisCI, CircleCi or anywhere. We just prefer to use AppVeyor because it's the smoothest CI server IMHO, but the transition elsewhere is just a matter of invoking a single build script.

I genuinely also prefer to work with a product which is doing one thing really good instead of having one product which does everything mediocre. From an operations POV it is just as simple as having everything in one place. We have one browser tab open for each service and it makes us actually a lot more productive. I am always only 1-2 clicks max away from what I need.

Teams/Companies who choose an all-in-one solution (e.g. everything in Azure + Azure DevOps) don't care about the productivity of their teams IMHO. They care more about the one person who has to do the accounting for their subscriptions or something like that :/

Yeah, don't bother. We just started using it at work a few days ago. Not a single page loads in less than 7 seconds (with a primed cache, a completely fresh load takes 30+). Every page also pulls in 50+ subrequests, many of which have caching disabled. It's a new org, new project, and a single digit number of issues, so this can't be a scale issue (though I dread to imagine how awful that would be).

That would be understandable (though hardly acceptable) for an SPA, but this is Enterprise, where every navigation still requires a full reload, and the page you're actually looking for (the issue page) is never less than 3 links away from the useless dashboard that some designer put in because that's what all the cool kids do.

How did this shit get past QA? Did the QA people give up on trying to file any issues because the UI was so slow? Do all developers at Atlassian have a Stockholm Syndrome that would put Microsoft to shame? That this actually made it through development (nevermind that it somehow has paying users) is absolutely mind-boggling.

Have you ever used waffle or something like it? Waffle attaches PRs as little rows underneath the primary card. On the PR row you have a one click link to pop open the PR in a new tab, an indicator of each review on the PR (and its status - whether there are new comments etc), an indicator of the build status and the ability to assign someone to the individual PR as opposed to the card as a whole.

As a developer lead, these features are extraordinarily useful. I can see the exact state of the card, and all its attached PRs across multiple repos, at a glance. I can jump into any of the PRs to contribute comments, update a review, make a review. I can make use of the PR assignment to assign different people to different parts of the overarching card (assign a different dev to the infrastructure PR, than for the front end PR, for instance) or to assign people to do the review while leaving the executing dev on the primary card.

It's a well designed UX that's trying to be exactly one thing: a highly functioning kanban board tightly integrated with Github. And it shows what good UX design can accomplish.

It's not perfect, but it's miles better than Jira and I'm feeling its lack having to move from Waffle to Jira.

To respond to the first point, I'm reacting to the fact that everything exists in common and must be associated rather than simply created. If someone's created a "Story Points" field already on another project, that's the one true "Story Points" field. If I want a different one for my project, I have to name it something else. And if other people have created a bunch of fields, you can quickly find yourself swimming in a mess.

Well, I just found the NextGen projects and have been playing around with them. This looks like a massive improvement. Fixes most of my pain points. I'm still going to miss Waffle's tight integration with Github -- being able to see the PRs under the cards along with their review and build status at a glance was wonderful.

But this makes Jira much less of an "Oh god, do I have to open that?" and much more of a tool I can actually make use of. Before I was in a state grudging accepting (because our PMs clearly needed it) while dreading the change. Now I can reach of state of peaceful acceptance. I'll make use of the feedback link as I find things. Thanks for the hard work I'm sure the team put in to make this real!

Edit to add: After playing with it more, I would just ask that you, at the least, make that PR icon that shows on the card clickable to jump straight to the PR. Or find someway to expose a list of PRs and their state on the card itself.