 |
 |
One of the great things you can customize in JIRA is the workflow, which lets you make the tool work the way you want it to instead of having to live with a pre-set workflow. You can have different workflows for different projects, so the workflow can be tailored for different groups, or tasks, etc. UC San Diego uses this to great effect, with different workflows customized to software development, digital library ingest, etc. -Esmé > On May 12, 2016, at 12:15 PM, Cynthia Ng <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > I've had some experience with JIRA, Redmine, and RT, and I think part of it > has to do with how much time you want to put into customizing the system to > fit your needs before you start using it. Here's my quick run down as I've > experienced them. > > JIRA - can be customized greatly, but can a lot of time to set it up > because of that. User interface is clear, but can be overwhelming. A very > big system that many have previously expressed concerns with maintaining. > (JIRA reminds me of Drupal, where everything is customizable, but you need > instructions sometimes on doing something "simple".) Can be fully > integrated with Confluence (wiki). Cost money (not sure how much). > > Redmine - Easy to setup and start working with. Supports multiple projects, > wiki, codeview, many of the other standard things out of the box. I found > the community to be very supportive as well. Cost: free. > > RT (Request Tracker) - Unfortunately, less about setup/maintenance of RT. > As a staff users, it's been easy to us, but I found many things unintuitive > and I've had a couple of issues getting permissions to work the way I want. > Though I believe it was not the newest version. > > In all 3 cases, my experience with users submitting issues has been for > them to fill out a form that submits an email, which gets forwarded to the > system. JIRA and Redmine both do very well in automatically putting it into > a specific area, tagged, etc. > > My vote goes to Redmine. When I asked this question a couple of years ago > on the list, that was the consensus the group came up with and I was very > happy with the speed at which we got it set up and running. > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Stuart A. Yeates <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> I’m looking for recommendations for software to run our much of our >> academic library back-of-house business-as-usual work. Things like incident >> management, CRM, documentation management, etc across three tiers of >> support. >> >> We’re looking for something more structured than a mediawiki wiki (which >> we’ve got) and probably less structured than full-blown ITIL. We’re happy >> with open source or proprietary, self-hosted or cloud solution, but we’re >> not happy to pay the kinds of money that Alemba (formerly VMWare) are >> asking for vFire Core (formerly VMware Service Manager). >> >> We have library management system (ALMA), a discovery system (PRIMO), a >> website (httpd, drupal), a proxy (EZproxy) and a copyright management >> system (Talis Aspire). Our institution provides us with user management, >> physical access management, VM host, email and physical infrastructure. >> >> Thoughts? >> >> -- >> ...let us be heard from red core to black sky >>