I want something much much simpler. Stick to the worse is better approach and adhere closer to the philosophy of doing one thing well.
It creates a class of salty user who go around doing things like calling you a blight in public.
Know your audience. UX != DevEx.
I hope not to do that again.
Jira's JQL is it's superpower, at least for finding and summarizing stuff, though it is better if issues are categorized well. The key to that is making sure it's not actively hostile to your users. Unfortunately the defaults and the way the admin tools enable BOFH-syndrome make this an uphill battle, which is why so many jira installs are bad.
Now that said, the speed, stupid markup syntax and some other things still would make me do a good look for others prior to starting something on jira again. But jira can be decent, and there is much, much worse.
Everyone does Task #1 fantastically. Task #1 is easy, it's greenfield by definition.
How does your solution scale to Task #5509 when things have gone pear-shaped and there are legacy considerations that demand consideration?
The idea here is the "Roadmap" view you're seeing only shows tickets which are not completed. You might have Phase 1 -> Bugs (e.g. #803) opened 2 years ago and not closed if you choose to organise them that way but the Task #5509 comes, get completed then is removed from the view.
Still playing with how to scale projects across multiple departments and show only the tasks your team cares about though, which would make that view even smaller. Right now I'm thinking either by being able to filter on any single Task or just use the existing Labels. Thinking about how to do this without bloating the language with Teams or Squads etc. though is interesting.
Author here. I totally agree with you. Not only that, we purchase the software because it sells us on being able to fit the needs of the organization but at the end of the day most of the companies I worked for only use sprints successfully.
It ticks all of the boxes and more boxes than its competitors in customers' managements' requirements spreadsheet, it's priced to sell well, there is an ecosystem and a marketplace, and the sales demos show that all of this works smoothly.
We should be praising Atlassian for following the UNIX philosophy, not condemning it.
I wonder if Jira inevitably becomes slower, overtime, as customers add configuration they deem necessary. Jira, having multiple options available, will happily accommodate it without considering optimization as a boundary. A vanilla instance of Jira, more than likely, outperforms any custom configuration a customer will eventually apply.
But that's just one theory.