I have no strong feelings, however relying too much on single service
vendor is never a good idea. In this case if one day, by some
terms&condition changes, github repos are not an option any more, we are
fine with ASF infrastructure. But we can't do same thing for issues
which are embedded in GH database. If you ever found a google code
project migrated into github/gitlab issues you know what I mean.
While policies imposed on JIRA account creation, are without doubt a
bearer to contribute first bug report, JIRA itself helps us keeping all
ASF information together. Just to be clear - I keep being lost with new
JIRA user interface, I'm just reflecting my personal thoughts.
Best,
Łukasz
On 27.05.2023 09:30, Hervé Boutemy wrote:
Le vendredi 26 mai 2023, 19:41:53 CEST Benjamin Marwell a écrit :
Big +1, as more and more projects are already migrating (including Apache
Shiro).
I'd vote for maven-jlink-plugin: Not many issues currently.
not having to create an issue if a PR exists first
I'd at least make milestones mandatory in that case.
AFAIK, GH Milestones are useful when you want to assign an issue that is not
yet fixed
see for example https://github.com/apache/maven-mvnd/milestones
But it does not seem absolutely necessary, since GH Release Notes will get the
release content once the issue is fixed
example: https://github.com/apache/maven-mvnd/releases
We'll need to define which GH Labels are available, and how the release notes
drafter use it to have better release notes
https://github.com/apache/maven-mvnd/labels
It is far less work than maintaining an issue.
Am Fr., 26. Mai 2023 um 09:44 Uhr schrieb Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org>:
Hi,
This has been already discussed in the past.
But due to recent changes in ASF Jira infrastructure (limitation of
Jira users, validation of account creation).
Maybe we could reconsider moving from Jira to GH issues and why not
simplify the workflow as well.
I imagine not having to create an issue if a PR exists first (sounds
like duplicate work).
By the way, release notes will be automatically created from PRs.
(could be manually modified if a change doesn't have a PR).
Regarding migration, we can start project by project.
Few options:
- extreme simplicity, do not migrate any data (just mark the Jira
project as read only with a banner/link to corresponding gh issues).
If someone really needs an issue to get fixed he will clone it to GH
- middle complexity, migrate only open issues (components moved as a
label)
- extreme complexity, migrate all issues of a project (components
moved as a label and version created)
We can start by small projects such as cache-extension and one plugin
(compiler?)
Regarding GH discussions, maybe we can open discussions for
https://github.com/apache/maven which sounds like a natural place for
users to go. (discussions could be mirrored to a ML)
I do not have a strong opinion here, but I feel like opening
discussions for every single repo will be complicated to follow up.
WDYT?
cheers
Olivier
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
