Add Status Jira Simplified Workflow

[DerivcoITServer]

This question is in reference to Atlassian Documentation: Using the Simplified Workflow

Adding statuses to workflows is usually a JIRA admin functionality. Recently we have noticed non JIRA administrators (rather project administrators) creating statuses on their own on projects that use Simplified workflows.  Why is this the case? Isn't this contradictory to the JIRA permissions?  

We are thus finding large amounts of custom statuses convoluting the statuses page.  How can we prevent this? Should we be concerned about large amounts of these customization's especially these statuses causing issues with JIRA performance in the long run? 

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist- · Accepted solution]

No.  It's a deliberate implementation of JIRA Software.

When a "simplified workflow" is chosen, the project administrators are able to do what they want with the list of status in their workflows.

If you want to stop them doing this, you'll need to take away the simplified workflow.  Make a workflow scheme with the workflow(s) you want them to have, and apply it to the project(s).  They won't be able to add/change status any more.

Huge number of status won't make a huge difference to performance, there are many other more important factors.  It can become a pain for admins though.

[DerivcoITServer]

Thanks for your quick response.

Would it be safe to assume that Atlassian is working on a permission scheme that will allow project admins more control of their projects, by allowing customization to workflows, schemes, screens ,etc for their projects, rather than having JIRA admins to do these tasks?

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

No, I wouldn't assume that - you've already seen the mess "too many admins" can make with a little bit of power, and Atlassian are being cautious about delegation.  They are looking at something, but I very much doubt it's going to be "let them do everything".  Personally, I'm hoping for project-schemes - administrators define a collection of schemes and the project owners can select the one they want to use.

[DerivcoITServer]

 Its a nightmare. I like your idea.

[April Clark]

I agree that it's a nightmare. I had a status called "Waiting" because people had requested a way to indicate that they were waiting for input from others. That wasn't enough for some. Using the simplified workflow, they have now added "Waiting for Customer", "Waiting on Customer", "Waiting for Others" and "Waiting to Present". Similarly, we now have "Development" (intentional) and "Developement" - created via simplified. It's a terrible design choice.

[Nic Brough -Adaptavist-]

That's exactly the case where an admin should interfere, saying "if you can't be trusted with simplified workflows, we will take them away".  Explain the global impact on everyone of having pointlessly duplicated status and extra complexity.