I am +1 for using JIRA. Managing bigger projects within MXNet on JIRA brings openness to the project. MXNet Users and the contributors also get a sense of where the project is heading. Bigger Tasks can be divided into sub-tasks which contributors can pick up small tasks based on their expertise on and contribute independently.
On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:40 AM, Chris Olivier <cjolivie...@gmail.com> wrote: > The vote was discussed on private@ before the vote on dev@, and the vote > went on for a very long time. There was ZERO resistance. No one "snuck" > it in or "slipped it by". > > This, hopefully, phases out both SIM and tt, which are both are being used > in ways that aren't what they're even designed for, IMO. Trouble tickets > are being used as a backlog for my team, which is insane. > > I've actually sent out a couple of mails on dev about contact me if you > don't have access to JIRA. If you would like to participate in the > direction of the project, please keep up with the dev email list. > > I gave you contributor permissions on JIRA, btw. > . > > > > On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 10:17 AM, Aaron Markham <aaron.s.mark...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > I'm not quite sure if I have enough background on reasons for or against > > this to vote in the next round, but my two cents: I didn't see much > debate > > on why we need yet another tool for issues that we have to manually > > maintain...the vote kind of slid in there without many stakeholders > > realizing what they were being signed up for. I was thinking, sure, if > YOU > > want to make jira tickets, go right ahead. I have two internal ticketing > > systems to deal with already that assign tasks on MXNet, plus GitHub. > Jira > > would be four. Happy to make it work, but I'll need fifth tool to > aggregate > > communications and metrics between the other four tools! I'm only sort of > > joking. > > > > I saw Chris's response, and ok the public visibility part makes sense, > but > > does this phase out any other overhead? Does it integrate? Jira has > > integration options so maybe we can eliminate some overhead... Like > > something that hooks into the GitHub api and generates jira tickets on > the > > fly... I want to believe there's a plan that makes this all easier. > > > > What value I don't see is how we lower barriers to contribution and make > it > > more fluid for new users that could become contributors. What's the story > > and value proposition? > > > > Also, I don't see any docs on the website or on github on how to sign up > > for jira, or how to contribute according to this new requirement anywhere > > on the site. Myself and new contributors wouldn't know what the expected > > flow looks like because it's not really accessible. I now see the > > confluence wiki, but that's pretty much hidden from anyone browsing the > > site or github and looking to contribute. Why is this info on confluence > at > > all? Why not in the docs on github that are rendered to the website? Or > > conversely, why is some of the info on github and on the website, if it > is > > being maintained and current only on confluence? > > > > These are two separate issues really, but I think if you want buy-in, > this > > needs to be more transparent and obvious, and provide clear reasons and > > benefits to why you're asking for more overhead. > > > > Aaron > > > > On Mar 6, 2018 21:14, "Eric Xie" <j...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > -1 > > > > > > JIRA is ancient and arcane. This adds unnecessary overhead. > > > > > > On 2018/03/03 06:11:12, CodingCat <coding...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > This vote passes with 6 +1 votes (6 bindings) and no 0 or -1 votes. > > > > > > > > Binding +1: > > > > Chris Olivier > > > > Indhu Bharathi > > > > Suneel Marthi > > > > Yuan Tang > > > > Marco de Abreu > > > > Sebastian Schelter > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Vote thread: > > > > https://lists.apache.org/list.html?d...@mxnet.apache.org:lte= > > > 1M:tracking%20code%20changes%20with%20JIRA%20by%20associatin > > > g%20pull%20requests > > > > > > > > I will continue with pushing the content to wiki and take it into > > > practice > > > > > > > > > >
