3 ms·
For any soon-to-be-ex Atlassian Server (self-hosted) customers, I've set up a Zulip server for discussing alternatives: https://chat.goodbyeserver.org/ https:/
by jeff_redradish 6y ago
For any soon-to-be-ex Atlassian Server (self-hosted) customers, I've set up a Zulip server for discussing alternatives:
https://chat.goodbyeserver.org/ https://chat.goodbyeserver.org/
It's an difficult position Atlassian are inflicting on tens of thousands of customers. Atlassian's self-hosted products are uniquely flexible, being built on a plugin architecture, and many orgs have indeed customized Jira extensively with plugins, notably ScriptRunner [1]. Atlassian's Cloud plugins have their APIs, but have nothing like the same flexibility. A lot of functionality just isn't possible in the Cloud architecture. It's a bit like Firefox moving from XUL to an extension API.
In my opinion, the most customer-respecting way forward would be for Atlassian to open-source their discontinued Server product line. Go to the "open core" model with the clustered Data Center product as the upsell. This avoids screwing over their customers, and if their Cloud product really is as good as they say, customers will migrate to it naturally over time. It's the kind of damn-the-torpedoes move I think Mike CB would like.
But over the next 3 years, lots of painful migrating or evaluating-of-alternatives will need to happen, and perhaps a non-Atlassian forum for sharing experiences will help.
[1] https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/6820/scriptrunner-for-jira https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/6820/scriptrunner-for...
- chii 6y ago> open-source their discontinued Server product line little did you know, the source code for atlassian server products is already available for any paying customers. It's not FOSS, but if you need to run this yourself, and customize it, it's already possible. But of course, you will be responsible for keeping it updated (patching vulnerabilities from libraries etc).
- jeff_redradish 6y agoI mean under an Open Source license, which the Atlassian Software License Agreement [1] is very far from being. It forbids you to even redistribute patches between licensees. [1] https://www.atlassian.com/legal/software-license-agreement https://www.atlassian.com/legal/software-license-agreement
- laurent92 6y agoI’ve never succeeded to compile it, and like Android, most of the code is in non-public plugins. I’ve been a developer for long and we can only use it to look at algos of the core product, but not execute them.
- thu2111 6y agoI promoted it upthread (though I have no connection to JetBrains), but I'd note that YouTrack and their other team products have extensive Java and REST plugin APIs so they're also very customisable. Actually YouTrack lets you write workflow logic in JavaScript too.
- jeff_redradish 6y agoI would like to like YouTrack, but I've always been put off by own custom database [1]. I like my data in relational databases. SQL is the ultimate read-write API. Jira (unintentionally) stands on the shoulders of giants in this regard. [1] https://github.com/JetBrains/xodus https://github.com/JetBrains/xodus
- thu2111 6y agoProblem is that DB schemas are unlikely to be exposed as a real API by any app. It may feel like an API but actually writing software that pokes DB tables directly would just create the kind of support and upgrade headaches that presumably are driving Atlassian to this decision. The other advantage of the JB approach is it's one click install and upgrade. No schema migrations, complicated issues with DBA hoarding permissions etc.
- benhurmarcel 6y agoI'm curious if anyone knows of a decent alternative that's not only focused on organizations producing code.
- ashtonkem 6y agoPlugins are great until you crash your standup board because the “Recycle” plugin put stories somewhere you can’t see but also didn’t remove the story from the sprint, causing permission issues. A lot of what makes Jira so broken is that it is way too flexible, and this flexibility has costs in terms of performance and stability. There’s a damn good reason why I used Chrome back in the XUL days for FF; because XUL FF was not performant or stable for me back then.