Suggestion: A tree view of requirements
Other software have such reports:
In my industry we use 4 to 5 levels of requirements nesting arranged in a structure like the following
and we track actual implementation progress in Jira with the links to 4th and 5th requirements levels.
We need to have the same.
Wow - that looks really great! This way the traceability matrix gets a complete new value for me - till now our very nested requirements couldn’t be displayed in such a compact form.
Again a great job!
Here is the result. Grouping all properties in the same cell wasn't clear, so we've instead created a button to display all properties in one go. The icon for the tree view was also modified:
After clicking the blue button:
We have the ability to merge similar cells. It used to be like that in RY 2.2, ~9 months ago, but there are subtle differences that you would get used to. However, the result with merged cells doesn't seem clear to me, so I'm not in favour of activating the merge of similar cells. What do you think?
The tree view will go live in 2.5.3.
Also interested in this feature. As a mockup looks fine. Would be nice if user could select requirement attributes displayed per requirement type.
Thank you very much for participating. If you start being bothered by us working on this ticket, attaching images or commenting, you can turn off notifications (click "Stop watching"), but we'd be pleased if you continue to interact.
Right now, we wonder how to deal with properties. Obviously you would certainly enjoy if we display the properties by default, and it would help other newcomers. However, if we display a treeview, the properties for the second level will be different from the first level. We would either end up with not displaying the properties, or displaying empty cells:
We are thinking about a single column, with a subtable, to display all properties. What would you think about the idea? I've drawn a mock-up and, at first sigh, it seems like it is not easier to read:
Thank you very much,
Displaying a nested column would be a great benefit - for me/my colleagues we currenty seldomly use the dependency+traceability matrix - we have too much requirements (small projects have > 600). Thus your proposal having a nested/foldable tree view inside the first column could solve one problem.
It would be nice to get this tree view of our requirements as better table of contents to build documents (we export our requirements as word/pdf files for our customers as part of contracts). The biggest effect would be indeed inside the matrix view.