+1 for option B. For A, I will need more data points to convince myself if GitHub issues will provide all the issue tracking functionality that Jira provides today.
Thanks, Udit On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 2:33 PM Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> wrote: > Looks like we can start with B has a lot of support. > I will start a VOTE on B alone and we can proceed if the VOTE passes. > > On Fri, Jul 16, 2021 at 8:05 AM Nishith <n3.nas...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 for option B. > > > > > On Jul 15, 2021, at 10:50 PM, Bhavani Sudha <bhavanisud...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > Completely agree on B. On A I feel the necessity to centralize > > everything > > > in one place but also without losing the capabilities of Jira. I think > we > > > will have to explore tools in eitherways. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Sudha > > > > > >> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 10:42 PM vino yang <yanghua1...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> +1 for option B. > > >> > > >> Best, > > >> Vino > > >> > > >> Sivabalan <n.siv...@gmail.com> 于2021年7月16日周五 上午10:35写道： > > >> > > >>> +1 on B. Not sure on A though. I understand the intent to have all in > > >>> one place. but not very sure if we can get all functionality > (version, > > >>> type, component, status, parent- child relation), etc ported over to > > >>> github. I assume labels are the only option we have to achieve these. > > >>> Probably, we should also document the labels in detail so that anyone > > >>> looking to take a look at untriaged issues should know how/where to > > look > > >>> at. If we plan to use GH issues for all, I am sure there will be a > lot > > of > > >>> proliferation of issues. > > >>> > > >>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 12:29 PM Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> > > >> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Based on this, I will start consolidating more of the cWiki content > to > > >>>> github wiki and master branch? > > >>>> > > >>>> JIRA vs GH Issue still probably needs more feedback. I do see the > > >>> tradeoffs > > >>>> there. > > >>>> > > >>>> On Fri, Jul 9, 2021 at 2:39 AM wei li <lw309637...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> +1 > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On 2021/07/02 03:40:51, Vinoth Chandar <vin...@apache.org> wrote: > > >>>>>> Hi all, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> When we incubated Hudi, we made some initial choices around > > >>>> collaboration > > >>>>>> tools of choice. I am wondering if there are still optimal, given > > >> the > > >>>>> scale > > >>>>>> of the community at this point. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Specifically, two points. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> A) Our issue tracker is JIRA, while we just use Github Issues for > > >>>> support > > >>>>>> triage. While JIRA is pretty advanced and gives us the ability to > > >>> track > > >>>>>> releases, versions and kanban boards, there are few practical > > >>>> operational > > >>>>>> problems. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> - Developers often open bug fixes/PR which all need to be > > >>> continuously > > >>>>>> tagged against a release version (fix version) > > >>>>>> - Referencing JIRAs from Pull Requests is great (we cannot do > > >> things > > >>>> like > > >>>>>> `fixes #1234` to close issues when PR lands, not an easy way to > > >> click > > >>>> and > > >>>>>> get to the JIRA) > > >>>>>> - Many more developers have a github account, to contribute to > Hudi > > >>>>> though, > > >>>>>> they need an additional sign-up on jira. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> So wondering if we should just use one thing - Github Issues, and > > >>> build > > >>>>>> scripts/hubot or something to get the missing project management > > >> from > > >>>>>> boards. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> B) Our design docs are on cWiki. Even though we link it off the > > >> site, > > >>>>> from > > >>>>>> my experience, many do not discover them. > > >>>>>> For large PRs, we need to manually enforce that design and code > are > > >>> in > > >>>>> sync > > >>>>>> before we land. If we can, I would love to make RFC being in good > > >>>> shape a > > >>>>>> pre-requisite for landing the PR. > > >>>>>> Once again, separate signup is needed to write design docs or > > >> comment > > >>>> on > > >>>>>> them. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> So, wondering if we can move our process docs etc into Github Wiki > > >>> and > > >>>>> RFCs > > >>>>>> to the master branch in a rfc folder, and we just use github PRs > to > > >>>> raise > > >>>>>> RFCs and discuss them. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> This all also makes it easy for us to measure community activity > > >> and > > >>>> keep > > >>>>>> streamlining our processes. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> personally, these different channels are overwhelming to me > > >> at-least > > >>> :) > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Love to hear thoughts. Please specify if you are for,against each > > >> of > > >>> A > > >>>>> and > > >>>>>> B. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Thanks > > >>>>>> Vinoth > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> Regards, > > >>> -Sivabalan > > >>> > > >> > > >
