This is a continuation of a previous post on Choosing a Project Management Platform for Agile Development
As a part of my evaluation of various Agile/Scrum Management systems, I will be installing three platforms on my Windows machine. As noted in the previous post (see above), there are a few requirements: it should be locally installable, and it should have updated support and forums. I will be evaluating three platforms: IceScrum, ScruWorks and JIRA + GreenHopper
IceScrum
Homepage: http://www.icescrum.org/en/
License: GNU Affero GPL V3
Platform: Web Portal (Tomcat with HSQLDB backend)
Pros:
- Great graphics for storycards and tasks
- Clearly laid out workflow (Planning -> Sprint -> Release)
- Auto-generated charts that are clear and undertandable
- No limitation on maximum number of users or installs
- Does one thing and does it well
- Has a well defined roadmap with active contributors
Cons:
- Huge memory hog. I was barely able to work on e-mail or surf the net while running this
- Installation can range from easy (*.bat auto-run) to hard (configure Tomcat). Hard is a relative term here because nobody in the office has used Tomcat or java servelets before
- Not a lot of supporting documentation on how to use this tool.
Summary:
I quite liked IceScrumm. It had very nice graphics, it was very easy to get up and running. However, much of the usage instruction relies on forums and direct contact with the developers. While it is nice, I like to know that there is solid documentation available to the average user. With that said, I was still able to get up and running in ~15 minutes, and after about an hour of fiddling around with it I managed to figure out the basic workflow.
ScrumWorks
Homepage: http://www.collab.net/community/scrumworks/
License: Free for first 10 users. More users will require a per-user, per year payment plan.
Platform: Desktop and Web Portal (Tomcat and MySQL backend)
Pros:
- Easy install
- Fairly robust Desktop and Web Interfaces
- Clearly defined modes, sections and stories
- Slick web interface
- Good documentation on installation and usage (for both web and desktop apps)
- Integrates with multiple systems (JIRA, Bugzilla, SVN, etc)
Cons:
- Dated and confusing Desktop GUI
- The Web interface has less powers than the Desktop app, and vice versa
- If you go beyond the initial 10 users, the pricing scheme is expensive and restrictive
Summary:
While ScrumWorks has a novel approach of using two interfaces, it ends up being a confusing hassle to manage both. While the Desktop GUI is more powerful, it has a confusing GUI. The web interface is well thought out, but it offers basic SCRUM management abilities. Furthermore, the pricing scheme is cost-prohibitive for a small company with tight budgets. The pricing scheme itself is on a per-year basis, so if at any time you want to stop paying, it feels like your projects are held hostage. On the plus side, ScrumWorks does have some great documentation and integration with other subsystems; but of the set of subsystems, our company only uses JIRA
JIRA
Homepage: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira/ and http://www.atlassian.com/software/greenhopper/
License: $20 or donation for first 10 users. More users will follow a per-user payment scheme.
Platform: Web Portal (JVM and MySQL backend)
Pros:
- Simple install
- Highly customizable
- Front-to end coverage (repository, issue tracking, feature management, etc)
- Large userbase with lots of exposure
- Add-on plugins
- Excellent documentation and support
Cons:
- Drab interface and weak graphical representation of the planning board
- Everything is an “issue”
- Agile planning is weak and feels hacked together
Summary:
JIRA by itself is an issue management system. Originally it was designed to manage defects, but over the course of time Plugins were created to fill various gaps in the software development process: Confluence, GreenHopper, Crucible, and more. By using JIRA + various plugins, JIRA has become a popular choice for companies of different shapes and sizes.
For my tests, I used JIRA with GreenHopper for agile planning. In comparison to ScrumWorks or IceScrumm, the planning board nowhere near as graphical, neat or easy to understand. The overall setup felt “hacky”. GreenHopper converts a “standard” issue into various agile planning elements: epics, stories and tasks. While GreenHopper does its best to create graphical representations of each, everything is still an “issue”. And while there is a logical and visual hierarchy of Stories > Tasks, there is none for Epics > Stories. For a plugin that can cost in excess of $800, you’d think they’d at least get that straight. Furthermore, Sprint management isn’t as simple as either ScrumWorks or IceScrum
Conclusion
If I was free to choose whatever platform I wanted, I would choose IceScrum. Its a bit of risk going OpenSource, but IceScrum has some very strong graphical elements that makes the entire SCRUM process easy to understand. Its also a breeze to manage. While it does not come with fancy support for SVN, defect tracking or built-in wikis, it does one thing only and it does it well.
However, being a company with multiple ongoing projects, I admit that we ended up going with JIRA + GreenHopper. There are two reasons for this:
- Another team has already decided on JIRA as a general issue tracking system. Because of this, there was significant pressure to join them and use a unified system for all our product lines. Since our two teams share multiple (human) resources, its even more important to share a single management system. We don’t want people to learn and use two different systems depending on the time of day!
- The existing project is working with an aging defect management + source control system. We need to migrate our code, and if its going to be anything, might as well use JIRA (for reason #1 above)
As of this blog post, we’ve been using JIRA + GreenHopper for 2 weeks now. The team is still getting used to it, and we’re learning new things everyday. For now we are happy, so we’ll see how things go!
