By Atlassian’s ToS, you are not allowed to « comment on the performance of the products ». I know no-one thinks this would be enforced here, but I just want to highlight that it doesn’t help a company to improve if they know they can just lawyer-up a problem away and avoid benchmarks and being compared on that topic.
(d) incorporate any Cloud Products into a product or service you provide to a third party;
does this mean that I can't integrate JIRA into a ticket tracking workflow that I build for my product with IFTTT that creates a new ticket when someone sends an email to a support alias?
(e) interfere with or otherwise circumvent mechanisms in the Cloud Products intended to limit your use;
(f) reverse engineer, disassemble, decompile, translate or otherwise seek to obtain or derive the source code, underlying ideas, algorithms, file formats or non-public APIs to any Cloud Products, except to the extent expressly permitted by applicable law (and then only upon advance notice to us);
(g) remove or obscure any proprietary or other notices contained in any Cloud Product;
Fair enough.
(h) use the Cloud Products for competitive analysis or to build competitive products;
Sure, I mean this is hard to enforce but if the team at Trello was using JIRA while making Trello, Atlassian could just say "hey - stop, no like".
(i) publicly disseminate information regarding the performance of the Cloud Products;
Seriously? I really didn't believe when I saw parent say you are not allowed to comment on performance of the product but I stand corrected. I will not comment on performance of any Atlassian product ever, ever ever. You got me Atlassian, this is what I get for not reading ToS before clicking Accept.
(j) encourage or assist any third party to do any of the foregoing.
Ok.
I'll try to get the legal team on it. It's a landmine as even a casual discussion of performance voids the license. Any discussion of outage may or may not involve this point.
It is a devops prevention clause.
Of course, that assumes such terms are enforceable. But, even if not, just having them in there is just so odious as to make one seek out other solutions.
If they ever terminated services for me because I commented on performance I would be the most loud person on the internet about it.
I would go to every review site, every comment board, and filter every title on every news aggregator and post as much statistics as I could about performance and issues that I had with it. Then I would state that they had terminated my services for commenting about it, with the proof.
I would be totally radicalised against them, it's absolutely insane that they even have this as a ToS, but if they ever enforced it I'm sure many people would salt the fucking earth.
I totally understand that benchmarking is hard, but using legal means to silence anyone from talking about aspects of your product is just downright scummy.
Just speculating, I bet they've decided a lawsuit would be cheaper than figuring out how their spaghetti code works to be able to safely delete a few fields.
Still both are huge and so configurable that saying one is familiar with JIRA is like saying one is familiar with C++ or Microsoft Word. Which begs the question, familiar with which parts and what versions?
I ask that you try clubhouse or another tool that has more modern UIs. You feel that JIRA next gen is great only compared to JIRA classic. Next gen is still years behind in UX.
I've never used Jira Classic, so can't comment there.
But Jira Next Gen projects have been great to work with. So much functionality and bloat is stripped out of Next Gen, sometimes too much was removed I think.
I hear people hating on Jira very often, but at least the way our company uses it, it's great.
The only thing I'd really want to change is (1) performance, page load times are frustrating, and (2) ability to easily move a ticket from 1 project to another project without clicking through a 6 step process.
Edit: Regarding Jira's slowness, I'd highly recommend trying the Mac app which is dramatically faster than the web ui.