+1 for a trial... because we shouldn't be afraid to experiment with our workflows. I also like working on GH, and want to see if it will result in a valuable change or not for Accumulo, and if it is, I'd like to switch to it at some point (I like the trial first, because I don't know if there will be unforeseen problems).
Additionally, I think that: GH issue tracker could potentially lower the bar to reporting issues since many devs use GitHub already. It would allow integration/exposure via external initiatives, like Hacktoberfest by using GH labels. It could improve readability of commit logs by avoiding lengthy links to JIRA issue numbers. No need to create an issue for the sole purpose of "checking the box" to have an issue to mention in the log (since PRs are issues). It would improve linking between PRs and issues. Markdown in GH is much more friendly than JIRA's syntax. Reduced mailing list spam from redundant emails and integration with JIRA. JIRA is frequently offline for maintenance. Some potential downsides: Lack of multiple milestones for an issue (there are workarounds) Lack of batch issue changes Change in momentum could be confusing to contributors I think a trial period could help us understand whether the potential downsides are worse than the benefits, and whether or not we can develop workflows that mitigate against those downsides. On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:06 PM Mike Walch <mwa...@apache.org> wrote: > I would like to open discussion on moving from Jira to GitHub issues. > GitHub issues would be enabled for a trial period. After this trial period, > the project would either move completely to GitHub issues or keep using > Jira. Two issue trackers would not be used after trial period. >
