I am currently engaged in consulting a german authority regarding the DC EoL. Besides the political aspect which I do not want to cover, there is the technical aspect. What I am curious about is what kind of strategic moves do you already see on the horizon? Like the following: - Asset likely will be untied from JSM - usage based pricing: Asset objects, Rovo conversations, AI usage - push towards collections - more than the usual 10-15% pricing increase when DC is sunsetted Maybe I missed some tendencies, which are already obvious?

My team does operations tickets (incidents, support tickets) AND new feature development. We do not have any QA people - instead we depend on our production team to do QA before we deploy to prod. We also have external customers that need to do UAT testing in our UAT environment. Issue — because we are reliant on the production team or the customer to clear QA and UAT, tickets can stall at that stage for weeks. Right now the workflow looks like this: Backlog —> To Do (Assigned) —> In Progress —> In Review —> Ready for QA —> In QA —> Ready for UAT —> In UAT —> Ready for Prod —> Done (which means Deployed to Production) So, my devs do the work and the code Review then the ticket stalls at QA or UAT for weeks waiting for the other team or customer to do their part. This time adds time against the ticket that is not an accurate reflection of my team’s work. How do you handle these things? Do you break each piece of work to a separate sub-task? (Like Development ticket, QA ticket, etc?) I’ve been racking my brain and am looking for some new ideas/suggestions. Do you break off that piece to another project so that the team’s work from to do thru Code Review is what is measured?

What's your preferred way of work? Especially for work or Atlassian Jira, when you inherit it all from prior colleagues. :) You like to set up everything anew and customize from there, or you rather organise, cleanup and optimise the inherited "mess"? :)

Hi everyone, Has anyone built any useful Rovo Agents? Would love to hear about your use cases.

Hey everyone! As I was brushing my teeth this morning (which is usually the time I'm most reflective), I wondered how other orgs that you guys work in or have consulted with like to manage your workflows and schemes? I've worked in both a very disciplined and totally chaotic environments, and really see how essential it is to have consistency across teams. In the past, we have leveraged that by having a single scheme and workflow across multiple spaces (and with some minor exceptions for non tech teams kept a like for like mirror image of those items with some minor adjustments based on their individual team needs) But on the flip-side, if you need to put mandatory fields or validations on workflows to improve the discipline of some teams but not others, would you feel that having several duplicate schemes works best in these regards? Or do you just apply a one size fits all approach and stick with one single instance?