Past sprint remain on backlog

[Hardip Singh]

Hi All

Hope everyone is having a good week thus far. I have a broad question that might help with my understanding of Jira. 

We have a past sprint (sprint 8) that remains on the backlog. I did some digging into the data and found the following:

• 3 issues didn't have resolution dates so I asked the Scrum Master to add resolution status and a resolved date appeared. Albeit this resolved date is in the future as opposed to when the actual sprint finished.
• 2 issue had no assignee so this was addressed.
• 3 issues whilst being assigned to sprint 8 never appeared on the burndown report. All had an issue type Task and looked like placeholder tasks. As they never appeared on the reporting I asked the Scrum Master to remove the sprint from the issues.

I thought this would remove sprint 8 from the backlog as we'd scrubbed the data. However it remains firmly anchored in the backlog (see the image).

I then looked at the burndown chart and reviewed each issue in the issue navigator. In my investigation I found the following:

• Issue 1: Was added at the start of sprint 8, was part of the sprint end issues when sprint 8 was completed. However from the issues navigator I can see the issue was actually resolved in sprint 9
• Issue 2-4: were added at the start of sprint 8, were part of the sprint end issues when sprint 8 was completed. However from the issues navigator I can see the issues were resolved in sprint 10
• Issue 5: Was added in sprint 8, and removed in sprint 8 and was resolved in sprint 10

I don't think issue 5 is a problem. However for issues 1-4 is the fact that the issues were added at the start of sprint 8, then formed part of the sprint completion and then resolved in future sprints the potential reason why Sprint 8 remains on the backlog?

However as sprint 9 and 10 are also closed now I'm at a loss to understand why sprint 8 remains. The Scrum Master has said he can delete the sprint from the board, however I don't know the behaviour of what this might do to the reporting e.g. would it orphan all issues that were originally in sprint 8?

Can anyone propose any other means to investigate why this might be happening.

I know these types of questions around historic events are difficult to resolve but I'm hoping someone might be able to open up some new pathways to investigate.

As always thanks to anyone that takes the time to respond.

Have a great day.

Regards

Hardip

[Dave Mathijs · Accepted solution]

Hi @Hardip Singh 

Odd question: Has the sprint been started/completed?

[Hardip Singh]

Hi @Dave Mathijs 

My investigation continued and I've found what I believe is the issue.

If you click on the "View in Issues Navigator" in the sprint backlog for sprint 8 the sprint ID is 11111. And this has no issues post scrubbing the data.

However, when you query Sprint 8 directly in the Issues Navigator by typing "sprint = "Sprint 8" you are presented with 2 sprints of the same name.

When the other sprint is selected via a query in the Issue Navigator the sprint ID is 11112 and all the issues are displayed.

My hypothesis is that the Scrum Master created an initial sprint 8 (with ID 11111) and added some issues. Then for some reason created another sprint of the same name which generated a new sprint ID of 11112. Thereafter they used sprint ID 11112, added all the issues and managed the sprint via this ID (11112).

When you review the URL for the burndown chart it ends with ID 11112. And not the rogue sprint (11111). When you change the URL to 11111 nothing is displayed. Or it defaults to the active sprint minus 1 (so the previous / closed sprint) which makes sense I think.

So sprint 8 (11111) anchored in the backlog has zero issues and can be deleted. It will not impact the history. Scrubbing the data as I asked for was correct because 11111 never existed. We were merely correcting the issues assigned to a sprint that never existed.

The Scrum Master has no recollection of doing this, but the data doesn't lie. There are two sprint 8's of the same name and date. And they weren't created magically. 

I think that's a fair summary but if you spot any holes let me know.

I'm not sure if you can accept my answer or not? :-)

Regards

Hardip

[Dave Mathijs]

That is an acceptable answer ;-)

[Hardip Singh]

@Dave Mathijs 

That made me laugh, so thanks for that!

Have a good day, and I will now accept the answer now I have your blessing ;-)

Cheers

Hardip