Crucible and FishEye development... dead?
Asked by Atlassian DRT:

Hi,

It's been a long time since we don't see anything new related to Crucible and FishEye. I know that 4.4.2 was released a week ago, but those issues were resolved several months ago (No idea why Atlassian didn't publish this version before).

So, the questions are:

* Are the FishEye/Crucible dev projects still alive?
* Should we expect new features? (I.e. Git metrics are partially supported, we're still missing many improvements to the long-awaited FE-3239)
* Why Atlassian didn't make any official announcement about it? There are tons of feature requests and bugs requested by users with no answers or planning.

Thanks in advance.


Answers:
author: Marek Parfianowicz
body: > I know that 4.4.2 was released a week ago, but those issues were resolved several months ago

I'm not sure what do you mean?

We release Fisheye/Crucible in quarterly cycles (release dates are not set in stone, so they may drift a little bit forward and backward, but in general the release cadence is kept).

In case you refer to statues of issues in our public Jira tracker ([Fisheye](https://jira.atlassian.com/projects/FE/issues) and [Crucible](https://jira.atlassian.com/projects/CRUC/issues) projects), we update issues as the development progresses. So in case some issue is done at the beginning of the release cycle, you can see it in the "fixed" state for 3 months until we release a new product version containing this issue.

> Should we expect new features? (I.e. Git metrics are partially supported, we're still missing many improvements to the long-awaited FE-3239)

Could you please clarify what do you mean by missing improvements? The FE-3239 issue has been resolved in version 4.3.0.

Note that the solution we implemented is slightly different from what we have for non-DVCS repositories as we delivered DLOC (delta lines of code) instead of LOC (lines of code). In our opinion this metric is much more useful because gives a better insight on repository activity.

> There are tons of feature requests and bugs requested by users with no answers or planning.

We usually do not publish our roadmaps and do not commit to any dates. (think about customers' disappointment if some feature would slip, for instance). We also use different sources of data for planning and prioritisation, so our public Jira instance is not the only "source of truth".

Please have a look at our policies to learn more:

* <https://confluence.atlassian.com/support/atlassian-bug-fixing-policy-201294573.html>
* <https://confluence.atlassian.com/support/implementation-of-new-features-policy-201294576.html>

comments: author: Georg Tsakumagos
body: Hi,

i've stumbled about the lack of wild card searches in fisheye. Searching the net you'll find the related issues: FE-824 \&   
FE-4790. Unresolved over 4 years. I've reviewed the release notes of any version 2017 so far. Not much features yet. Okay you got a bug first policy. So please explain why 4 of the 5 features you implement have less voting than the booth I've mentioned?

I'm very disappointed by the fact that jira is able to provide such a feature. Lucene does have wild card support.

I can understand the question from DRT. He possibly wait 7 years to get the desired graphs. We see the fish struggles and is somehow alive.