I like option 3 as well. Keeping the original numbers if possible. Since we also reference tickets in a lot of commit messages.
On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Daniel Hinojosa < [email protected]> wrote: > Dave, > > I agree with you that having as much history as possible would be the > preferred model. With that, +1 on option 3. > > d. > > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 8:39 AM, Dave Brondsema <[email protected]> wrote: > > > We should move our tickets from > https://sourceforge.net/p/allura/tickets/to > > https://forge-allura.apache.org/p/allura/ There's a lot of tickets > > there, and > > the hardest part I think is that its a mix of Allura tickets and non-OSS > > SourceForge tickets too. (Lately we've been making non-Allura tickets > > private, > > and also using different milestones, but that's not 100% true for all the > > tickets on SF). > > > > I want to propose a few options for how we want to handle the Allura > > tickets and > > then after that, SourceForge can figure out how to adapt some of its > other > > needs > > for internal tickets, related tickets, scheduling, etc. > > > > 1) Clean start; don't move any tickets. Easy, but a lot of context and > > history > > will be left on SF. Also there are many open tickets that would have to > be > > re-created. > > > > 2) Move open Allura tickets, preserving ticket #s (or, possibly, giving > > them new > > numbers starting at 1). This would leave behind closed tickets that > aren't > > "current" any more. We would have to sort out what open tickets are > > "allura" > > tickets and which are not. > > > > 3) Move all Allura tickets. We would have all of the project history in > > one > > place. But it would take even more time to sort through all the tickets > to > > determine what is "allura" and should be moved, and what should not. > > > > I prefer option 3. It's more work but will be very helpful to have all > > tickets > > in one place. I have pretty good knowledge of all the tickets and can be > > the > > one to sort out which to move and which to keep on SF. > > > > As far as the technical work to do a move, we can export all the data > > using the > > APIs. And we can write an import utility which handles the Allura > > api/export > > format (which would be good to do anyway). Many usernames wouldn't match > > up, > > and would have to be changed to "anonymous" or create a stub user in > > Allura (my > > preference). Cross-references (to wiki pages, chat logs, SF site-support > > tickets, etc) would break. > > > > How does that sound? Any other suggestions? > > > > > > -- > > Dave Brondsema : [email protected] > > http://www.brondsema.net : personal > > http://www.splike.com : programming > > <>< > > > > > > -- > *Daniel Hinojosa* > *Community Manager, SourceForge / Slashdot Media* > p: 415.890.3608 > e: [email protected] > facebook: facebook.com/d.Slashdotmedia > skype: hinojosad >
