Wrong commitment totals in the sprint dashboard

Ticket to log time: I created SE-4944.

This is a bug report and a warning: don’t trust the Committed and the Goal numbers in the sprints dashboard, especially if you’re working with RECURRING tasks.
You can find your real commitment by adding up all your individual commitments after clicking your name.

Here’s an example with my user: these numbers in the cell commitments page are wrong: the 34 should be showing 45.

It should show 45 because if I sum the numbers seen in my individual commitments page, they add up to 45, and they correctly reflect the reality in JIRA.


So the dashboard is showing that I have Remaining: 8 h (undercommitted), whereas in fact I’m at -3 h (overcommitted).

It happens with other members. You can do the test: manually add the numbers in your user’s commitments page, and compare it to the Committed number.
Here are a few random examples taken moments ago:

name „committed“ sum of individual commitments
Gábor 48 97
Adolfo 34 36
João 44 55
Pedro 15 15
Guruprasad 19 21
Giovanni 41 42
Piotr 84 84
Felipe 49 62
Samuel 55 58
Saksham 5 13

Note that the magnitude of the numbers isn’t very important because today we’re still planning the next sprint. What’s important is that for many people both numbers are different when looked through the 2 different views.

I thought that the bug was with subtasks, but it seems related to the RECURRING state instead.
For instance I’m assigned to SE-4938 which is a subtask in RECURRING state. I gave it an estimate of 100 hours. The 100 h appear at my individual commitments page:

However, the cell dashboard still shows 43 h (see 1st screenshot).

Taking Saksham’s simpler case from the table above: the dashboard counts 5 committed hours, but his individual commitments show: FAL-2368 (8), FAL-2377 (1), FAL-2281 (2), FAL-2366 (2), which amounts to 13 h. FAL-2368 is in RECURRING and it accounts for the 8 h difference between 5 and 13.

There may be other issues. There’s also a workaround: if you use a recurring task, add a Crafty directive [~crafty]: plan 100 hours per sprint for this task.
But we can’t expect everyone to remember to use the directive instead of the Remaining estimate field.

I think that the Committed number should match with the sum of the individual commitments. If Sprints knows how to count all type of tasks etc. in one view, it should know how to do it in the other one.

The Remaining column is computed using the Committed column, so it’s also showing that people have more available time than what they entered in JIRA.

This means that we tend to overcommit ourselves when we follow the dashboard’s cell page. It’s also hard to know who has hours available.

@Agrendalath Do we have a task in sprints v2 to make it count the tasks in the same way in both views? Should it be fixed in sprint v1 too?

1 Like


Shouldn’t it be “only”? I don’t see specific examples that don’t involve recurring tickets.

The recurring tasks have been designed this way because they usually have fixed commitments for them per sprint (e.g. weekly meeting). If you’re logging time in Jira, then you’re automatically reducing the remaining time. Therefore, this field is not going to be accurate in the next sprint anymore, unless you remember to adjust it. That’s why using the directives is a preferred way. This is a bit confusing, but I’m not aware of a better mechanism existing in Jira that would be suitable for such a use case. Displaying the “remaining time” on the individual commitments page is a bug, but we haven’t had time to fix it, as it was a low priority. I’ve created this issue.

Small status update. This issue was discussed on mattermost.

It turns out that the time reserved for reviewing tickets in “External Review/Blocker” wasn’t being included in the dashboard’s calculation.

This was addressed in merge requests 10 and 11, thanks to @Agrendalath :smiley:

That case was specific for @daniel. However, I’m not 100% sure if that was the case for other members.

I believe it would be a good idea to verify the commitments next sprint to ensure no other issues are taking place. :+1:

Thanks for the fix.

As for the recurring tasks:

Since we use Remaining estimate for everything else when we estimate the work, I think it’s counterintuitive that it gets ignores in recurring tasks. I keep forgetting about it.

There could be a warning, either from Sprints or from JIRA, saying that a value entered by the user is being ignored.
Sprints v2 (SprintCraft) could implement a feedback mechanism that informs the user about errors and warnings when parsing the calendar, task estimates, accounts, budgets, worker timezones/availability, etc.

1 Like