[gregmac]

I'll also add it's not always obviously wrong when it's setup.

For example, of course only QA people can use "Testing passed" transition. Of course there should be x, y, z fields filled out to be able to create the ticket. Well we're at it, let's make sure only the product manager can close a ticket with 'wontfix', and only the release manager can change a fixversion.

This is a really common problem with any workflow tool, where well-intentioned control points get in the way of actually Getting Things Done, both from the perspective of not thinking through all the complex scenarios (what? I have to fill out 5 fields before I can close this as a duplicate??) and from not trusting your employees (don't worry, a jr. dev is not going to re-assign a fix version even though they can -- or at least, they won't do it twice).

[ymerej]

For you, there is Github issues. Have fun, cowboy.

[nilkn]

More seriously, there's FogBugz, which intentionally is not very customizable to avoid the issues the above poster was referring to.

In my experience, FogBugz is a little too limited, so I do prefer Jira, but only when used by competent people who understand that the customization should not get in the way of getting things done and it should not be used to institutionalize a lack of trust in employees.

[voltagex_]

Having used HP Quality Centre, JIRA and Team Foundation, I think your snark is unwarranted and there is a middle ground to be found between very basic issue tracking and something completely overbearing like QC.

[glogla]

It's been years and HPQC still gives me nightmares.