Hi all, We ran the Jira -> GitHub issue migration on Saturday. 2485 tickets were migrated and can be seen here [1][2][3][4][5]. Parquet's Jira issue tracker is now in read-only mode and all issues received a comment linking them to their GitHub counterparts. We strived to keep contents and metadata as close to the originals as possible to minimise disruption to work of contributors and keep the historical record of work. Comments, issue crosslinks, attachments, versions, priorities and labels were preserved wherever possible. Authorship is indicated with Jira and GitHub (where known) usernames.
Migration did not preserve issue notification settings and even if you are tagged in the GitHub issue you will not be notified of changes. You can subscribe to GitHub issues you were watching on Jira by running our subscription transfer script [6]. I would like to thank everybody that worked on this and the original Arrow migration which this one was based on [7]. Rok [1] https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3Aasfimport [2] https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3Aasfimport [3] https://github.com/apache/parquet-site/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3Aasfimport [4] https://github.com/apache/parquet-testing/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3Aasfimport [5] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues?q=is%3Aissue+author%3Aasfimport+label%3A%22Component%3A+Parquet%22 [6] https://github.com/rok/arrow-migration/blob/main/transfer_parquet_subscriptions.py [7] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PARQUET-2502 On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 8:28 AM Gábor Szádovszky <ga...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Rok, > > Thanks for working on this! > * The mapping is perfect. There are some components which were deprecated > and then removed, including parquet-cascading, but they were part of > parquet-mr. > * I would agree these labels do not seem to be very useful. On the other > hand, we are migrating all the jiras with all the relevant data. I don't > have a strong opinion on either dropping or keeping these labels. > > Cheers, > Gabor > > Rok Mihevc <rok.mih...@gmail.com> ezt írta (időpont: 2024. jún. 13., Cs, > 20:03): > > > I'll start a vote thread but would still welcome any feedback. > > > > It would also be nice to confirm the following: > > * is the component-to-repo mapping ok as proposed (e.g. > > jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java) > > * do we want to keep old labels? they were not used much in Jira see > label > > counts below (this is for ~1500 java issues): > > > > pull-request-available 268 > > filter2 12 > > newbie 8 > > pick-me-up 8 > > parquet 5 > > parquetWriter 4 > > security 4 > > patch 4 > > features 3 > > easyfix 3 > > documentation 3 > > beginner 2 > > java 2 > > avro 2 > > Parquet 2 > > noob 2 > > performance 2 > > random-access 1 > > decimal 1 > > fixed 1 > > empty-file 1 > > Drill 1 > > parquet-tools 1 > > jackson-databind 1 > > vulnerabilities 1 > > bug 1 > > column 1 > > parquetReader 1 > > usability 1 > > newbe 1 > > n00b 1 > > ProtoParquetWriter.Builder 1 > > correctness 1 > > serde 1 > > None 1 > > spark 1 > > nullpointerexception 1 > > hive 1 > > hadoop 1 > > OOM 1 > > question 1 > > unique 1 > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 5:43 PM Micah Kornfield <emkornfi...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Maybe we should just start the vote? > > > > > > On Thursday, June 13, 2024, Julien Le Dem <jul...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 4:49 PM Uwe L. Korn <uw...@xhochy.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > +1 (binding) > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024, at 4:42 PM, Micah Kornfield wrote: > > > > > > +1 (non-binding) rom me > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, June 13, 2024, Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > >> +1 on this > > > > > >> > > > > > >> BTW, I created following PRs to enable github issues to these > > > repos: > > > > > >> - https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/255 > > > > > >> - https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/1362 > > > > > >> - https://github.com/apache/parquet-testing/pull/50 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I will not merge them until the formal vote passes. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Best, > > > > > >> Gang > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 7:43 PM Rok Mihevc < > rok.mih...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > Hi all, > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Discussing migration of parquet-cpp issues into Arrow's GitHub > > > issue > > > > > >> > tracker [1] produced the idea of moving other parquet tickets > > into > > > > > GitHub > > > > > >> > issue trackers as well. > > > > > >> > Since parquet-format, parquet-site and parquet-testing > separate > > > > repos, > > > > > >> > issues related to them should probably be moved into their > issue > > > > > >> trackers. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > To preview the state after migration I've split tickets by > > > component > > > > > (see > > > > > >> > mapping below) and imported them into testing repos for > preview. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-avro --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-cascading --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-cli --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-cpp --> github/arrow > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-format --> github//parquet-format > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-hadoop --> github//parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-mr --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-pig --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-protobuf --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-site --> github/parquet-site > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-testing --> github/parquet-testing > > > > > >> > jira/parquet-thrift --> github/parquet-java > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rok/test-parquet-cpp/issues > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rok/test-parquet-java/issues > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rok/test-parquet-format/issues > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rok/test-parquet-site/issues > > > > > >> > https://github.com/rok/test-parquet-testing/issues > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > I would like to start a discussion here to see if the > community > > is > > > > > open > > > > > >> to > > > > > >> > migration, should proposed migration be amended and to call > for > > a > > > > > vote if > > > > > >> > we reach consensus. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > For some considerations the Arrow community had when migrating > > you > > > > can > > > > > >> also > > > > > >> > see related issue [2]. > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > [1] > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/zklp0lwcbcsdzgxoxy6wqjwrvt6y4s > > > > 9p > > > > > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/14542 > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > Rok > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
