Hi everyone,
I’d like to clarify a versioning question in Jira from a development and release management perspective.
We recently released a story as part of Fix Version 1.1.0. During QA verification, a bug related to that story was identified. We fixed the bug and included it in a patch release (Fix Version 1.1.1).
Our current approach is:
Keep the story’s Fix Version as 1.1.0, since that’s when the planned feature work was completed and released.
Assign the bug’s Fix Version as 1.1.1, reflecting the version where the unplanned fix was delivered.
However, there is an another perspective from my friend that we should also add 1.1.1 to the original story’s Fix Version, since the functionality wasn’t “complete” until the bug was resolved.
In my opinion, doing so could confuse release tracking and misrepresent what was actually delivered in 1.1.0. Bugs are part of the software lifecycle and are usually tracked and fixed separately without altering the original delivery story.
So my questions are:
Would love to hear your thoughts or any official guidance from Atlassian.
Thanks in advance!
I would agree with you, and not update the original story. That story was delivered with the best intentions of completing the work item, the related bug fix and delivery should be tracked separately.
Hi @Shehan Sandeepa -- Welcome to the Atlassian Community!
Yes, and...to the suggestion from Shawn:
Perhaps consider using issue linking to associate the story and any defects found / fixed later. That would enable analysis by the team to learn how they could improve to prevent such defect types later.
Kind regards,
Bill
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi @Shawn Doyle - ReleaseTEAM ,
Thanks a lot for your insight, really appreciate the confirmation!
It's reassuring to know that keeping the original story’s Fix Version as 1.1.0, while assigning 1.1.1 only to the bug fix, is in line with best practices. This separation definitely helps keep our release records clean and avoids confusion during post-release analysis.
Grateful for your support in clearing this up!
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi @Bill Sheboy ,
Thank you for the warm welcome and for building on Shawn’s suggestion!
We’re actually already practicing issue linking between stories and any related defects, and I completely agree that it’s a great way to maintain traceability and support team learning during retrospectives. It’s reassuring to hear we’re on the right track.
Appreciate your input and support!
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Online forums and learning are now in one easy-to-use experience.
By continuing, you accept the updated Community Terms of Use and acknowledge the Privacy Policy. Your public name, photo, and achievements may be publicly visible and available in search engines.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.