I think we'd still have the mailing lists open for discussion. So anyone not willing or able to use GitHub would still be able to participate in a meaningful way. Having two parallel bug trackers seems much less useful to me. I'd rather have people emailing to a list that is active rather than posting comments to a repository that we may very likely start to ignore.
On Sun, Jul 17, 2022, 10:09 AM Tomoko Uchida <tomoko.uchida.1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Mike for opening the discussion. > > I don't really have a clear "opinion" on that, but I just wanted to try to > explain my perspective. > > Today almost all development is already going on GitHub pull requests, > then it would be a natural direction for the majority of devs to move our > primary conversation platform to GitHub. I think we should try to optimize > our environment for majorities, although I know we will never be able to > reach a unanimous agreement. > Meanwhile, it was not my intention to completely discontinue the > contribution path via Jira. I rather optimistically thought we could leave > room for developers who don't use GitHub for any reason. > > As for preventing someone from "accidentally" opening Jira issues, we > could show a text that says "Jira has been deprecated. Please open GitHub > issue unless you are not able to do so." when he/she is attempting to open > Jira. > > https://confluence.atlassian.com/adminjiraserver/configuring-contexts-and-default-values-for-the-description-field-1047552727.html > > I agree that it'd be the cleanest way to make Jira read-only and I myself > am fine with the proposal - maybe I'm overthinking. > > Tomoko > > > 2022年7月17日(日) 22:13 Michael McCandless <luc...@mikemccandless.com>: > >> Hi Team, >> >> Thanks to Tomoko's amazing hard work ( >> https://github.com/apache/lucene-jira-archive), we are getting close to >> having strong tooling and a solid plan to migrate all past Jira issues to >> GItHub issues! >> >> But one contentious point is whether to leave Jira read-only or >> read-write after the migration. So let's DISCUSS and maybe VOTE to reach >> concensus? >> >> My opinion: I think it'd be crazy to leave Jira read/write. We would >> effectively have two issue trackers. New users who find Jira through >> Google, or through links we have in old blog posts, etc., might >> accidentally open new Jira issues or comment on old ones and we may not >> even notice. I think that would harm our community. >> >> I would prefer that we make a nearly atomic switch -- up until time X we >> use Jira, then it goes read-only and at time X + t (t being how long the >> migration takes, likely a day or two?), GitHub issues opens for business. >> This way we clarly have only one issue tracker at (nearly) all times. This >> would make a clean migration, and reduce risk of trapping users. >> >> Other opinions? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Mike >> -- >> Mike McCandless >> >> http://blog.mikemccandless.com >> >
