-1 I am satisfied with the current situation.
My vote might be biased because I have used Jira for many years (and I have
never used Github for issue tracking).
I have the impression that some of the problems described discussion are
not per se Jira-related, but they appear because we misuse the current
tools (and it would remain more or less the same if we switched from Jira
to GitHub Issues).
I like the current workflow, as described in the website [1]; the
navigation between Jira and Github can be inconvenient for some, but for me
it is not painful.
IMO every change must have a dedicated Jira ticket, that should be the
norm; and having a ticket-less PR or commit should be exception, only for
very specific cases; high level discussion (e.g. feature design) should
happen in Jira, low-level details (e.g. line by line code review) in the
PR; but I must admit that sometimes this does not happen.
I think Jira has some useful features that I'm not sure we can find in
Github (perhaps we can, as I said before, I'm not very familiar with it)
like customized dashboards, or linked issues ("issue A is blocked by /
caused by / duplicated by / ... issue B").
[1] https://calcite.apache.org/develop/#contributing
On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 9:12 AM Vladimir Sitnikov <
sitnikov.vladi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I think JIRA works well.
>
> I would appreciate it if you could clarify.
> What I suggest would work better than JIRA in virtually all the cases. So
> why stick with JIRA?
>
> Vladimir
>
