Hi Juergen, AIUI, issues in Jira would remain there forever, in read only mode, whatever the issues' migration approach. We'd add some prominent links on README.md, home page, jira itself, etc. Existing links to Jira issues would still remain reachable.
I asked at users@infra.a.o what path did Airflow take regarding this issues' migration, and they ended by migrating the active/important issues, and asking to reporters interested in pursuing their issues to (re-)open them as GH issues. Some of them did, others didn't. The main advantage of proceeding like this is that stale/outdated/invalid issues were swept, and they could focus on "real" issues. We currently have open issues which were updated more than 10 years ago so I suspect we may have a few of those :-/ cheers, juan pablo On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 3:36 PM Jürgen Weber <juer...@jwi.de> wrote: > The issues in Jira should not get lost, neither the closed ones. It is > important history. > > A quick search finds some migration scripts: > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31125655/is-there-a-way-to-import-jira-issues-to-github > https://gist.github.com/graemerocher/ee99ddef8d0e201f0615 > > and Spring data's experiences: > > https://spring.io/blog/2021/01/07/spring-data-s-migration-from-jira-to-github-issues > > Juergen > > Am Mo., 18. Okt. 2021 um 15:18 Uhr schrieb Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez > <juanpablo.san...@gmail.com>: > > > > Hi, > > > > some weeks ago, a thread on users@infra.a.o highlighted the benefits of > > moving from jira to github issues, based on Apache Airflow > > experience, which has been summarized here: > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=191332632 > > > > I've been mulling it since then and I've been thinking more and more that > > it would be convenient for us as well, we don't > > have too much movement these days, but the former links depicts some > PITAs > > that, at least for me, JIRA brings: > > dual-logging, integration, overall experience.. At least, I'd say I find > it > > cumbersome. > > > > The same article depicts how at Apache Airflow are using github issues, > and > > I've to say it's very appealling, just look at > > https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/new/choose and see how the > > different templates are set up. I personally do like > > a lot how the security vulnerability reports are managed, as opposed on > how > > are they tracked on JIRA. > > > > More importantly, the big selling point (for me) for this migration would > > not be having "better" issue management, but that > > I think it would help a lot increasing / recruiting contributions. > > > > This thread is not to decide if would should move, but rather to see what > > would be the main feeling about this, and, if positive, > > what would be the preferred approach on issues' migration (f.ex., I was > > thinking on coding a bulk migration, but the "crowd-source" > > approach described on the aforementioned link is one that being more fond > > of each day). > > > > So, WDYT? > > > > > > cheers, > > juan pablo >
