This is a good summary Justin. As someone who mostly follows issues these days-as opposed to contributing-a few things to add, having used both to manage work:
* Github has "projects" which allow you to organize tasks across repos -- which in some ways is helpful, but you have to know to look for the projects * Github milestones are a bit weird, and not as intuitive as target/fix versions, but they suffice -- as Justin points out, deciding how to use those, and reference issues/releases is important * The two tools are mostly comparable with some drawbacks to either: github is about 3 quarters as mature as Jira in many ways IMO, but if it saves the PMC time, that's a big draw. * I agree that the intent of making everything more approachable by using Github is a worthwhile goal, and probably a likely result -- especially if releases are being tagged + documented in the project * Seeing a repo with a ton of issues on github isn't really the best visual experience, as the github UI isn't super clear, so probably setting up/linking some project views would be the way to go On Tue, 2 Apr 2024, at 12:52 PM, Justin Bertram wrote: > There's been a few threads about this general subject, but most have > concentrated on Classic in particular. I think it's worth discussing > migration of ActiveMQ as a whole and diving a bit deeper into the details > of why a migration makes (or doesn't make) sense and what the challenges > may be. > > To this end I've put together this document [1]. I hope it will be of > service to the community as we consider this option. > > > Justin > > [1] > https://github.com/jbertram/activemq-website/wiki/Apache-ActiveMQ-GitHub-Issues-Migration-Review
