Hi all, I follow Richard’s proposal. In line with Kristian, I’m +1 for the Migration path „a“, ask INFRA. We - as a team - could thus spend our capacity on code, releases, the website, blog articles and so on.
Best Martin > Am 02.10.2026 um 11:55 schrieb Kristian Rickert <[email protected]>: > > +1 INFRA to do it. They would be better suited and likely have better > scripts than we would write. > > sidenote: there's def really good "nuggets" in there worth doing / have > been done (i.e. OPENNLP-547 + most of the addons I'll make are insipred by > this). > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 12:22 AM Richard Zowalla <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> as you know, we are currently running a split setup between GitHub and >> Jira. Jira is already read-only for regular users and only writable for >> committers/PMC members, while new issues are tracked on GitHub. >> This works, but it means two places to look, two places to link from, and >> some confusion for new contributors. >> >> I'd like to propose that we finally complete the move once 3.0.0 is >> released: >> >> 1. Release 3.0.0 as planned, using the current setup. >> 2. Afterwards, migrate all remaining open Jira tickets (including their >> comments) to GitHub Issues. >> 3. Make Jira fully read-only / archive the project, so GitHub becomes our >> single issue tracker. >> >> For the migration itself, there are two options: >> >> a) Ask Infra to do it. They recently asked whether anything is still left >> on our side, so this seems like a good moment to take them up on it. >> b) Do it ourselves, e.g. with a script against the Jira and GitHub APIs. >> >> Personally, I'd lean towards involving Infra, as they have done such >> migrations before and it saves us effort, but I'm open to either since I >> think only a low level 2digit will be left and AI can do that fast... >> >> What do you think? Any concerns, or anything we should take care of before >> the migration (labels, fix versions, links back to the original Jira >> issues, etc.)? >> >> Gruß >> Richard
