I'm okay with not retiring JIRA, but if we only allow PRs with JIRA tickets, we still have the same issue - the new contributors can't work on any problems without access to JIRA.
Yes, opening issue tabs will help with community feedback, but I don't think we get full benefit from it if we restrict it to be a "discussion only" place. The community of spark is not only users, but also occasional contributors. If we worry about the dramatic migration from JIRA, we can open github issues, and start building infra around it, while keeping the old system working. If we see a trend of committers using github issues more often, that's an indicator that people like github integration more than the existing JIRA system. Yes, migrating to github issues means we probably need to throw away a bunch of scripts for JIRA, but some of them are not necessary in the first place if we use github issues. For example, linking issues to PRs is a native supported feature in github. Github supports "squash-only" merge so people won't accidentally merge PRs with all the commit history. Github also supports "using PR description as commit message". Even if we do want extra flexibility, github bots have the advantages of authentication. For example, if I understand correctly, committers need their JIRA token to make the current merge script work - that won't be necessary if we use github. Github issues can be closed automatically when a linked PR is merged (with close #number) or a github bot can easily do that. Therefore, if we don't want to close JIRA, I'm totally fine with a dual-rail system which allows users to submit a PR based on a github issue, instead of a JIRA ticket. We can do that gradually and polish up all the infra required for github issues. Then we can make a decision whether to migrate completely. Tian Gao On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 2:47 PM Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> wrote: > -1 because I don't think we should move from the existing one (ASF JIRA) > to a new one (GitHub Issues) completely to meet the suggested ideas. It > sounds like a little overkill for the goals. They can be used more > harmoniously. > > Specifically, I want to counter-propose a simpler alternative which is > used already in some ASF projects: GitHub Issue Tab can be used as an > additional preliminary discussion place (receiving issue reports before > creating actual JIRA issues). Since this is open to all GitHub users, it > already meets the proposed goals. And, there is no reason to abandon ASF > JIRA because only worthy ideas will get JIRA IDs after closing duplicated > issues or naive Spark questions from GitHub Issue tabs. > > We can build a better layered issue reporting system by getting all the > benefits of the existing ASF JIRA infra and GitHub Issue Tab instead of > wasting lots of the community resources due to the drastic migration (or > abandoning the established system, script, practices). > > > I think we should move from JIRA to github issues for > > * more feedback from community > > * lower barrier to entry for new contributors > > * better integration with the whole github eco-system > > Dongjoon. > > > On 2026/01/27 14:57:00 Bjørn Jørgensen wrote: > > Github use mentioned instead of related to > > > > Like this > > [image: image.png] > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/48961 > > > > > > tir. 27. jan. 2026 kl. 14:58 skrev Nicholas Chammas < > > [email protected]>: > > > > > One thing GitHub Issues doesn’t have a native equivalent to are issue > > > links. GitHub will extract mentions of other tickets and highlight > them in > > > the side bar, but on Jira you can just link a ticket to another one > > > directly. > > > > > > Example: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-28024 > > > > > > [image: Screenshot 2026-01-27 at 8.55.28 AM.png] > > > > > > Not saying this is a blocker. Just calling this out so we can try to > > > preserve this information after the migration. > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > > On Jan 26, 2026, at 8:00 PM, DB Tsai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > +1, the bar for using JIRA is too high—contributors need a > PMC/committer > > > to create an account. Using GitHub issues would make it much easier for > > > people to participate. > > > DB Tsai | https://www.dbtsai.com/ | PGP 42E5B25A8F7A82C1 > > > > > > On Jan 26, 2026, at 2:30 PM, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > TBH, if we can manage to migrate all related repos in Apache Spark, I > feel > > > like it might be a great idea. > > > lately I started to actively work on Apache Arrow, and realised that > they > > > also successfully migrate to GitHub Issues from JIRA for all ther > repos. > > > > > > On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 at 05:49, Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi all, I'd like to start a discussion on a draft SPIP: > > >> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WMaA49hKyu7gtU189fPq4k8TeI-Q73Q6bqSeWAgR3y8/edit?usp=sharing > > >> > > >> tl; dr > > >> > > >> I think we should move from JIRA to github issues for > > >> * more feedback from community > > >> * lower barrier to entry for new contributors > > >> * better integration with the whole github eco-system > > >> > > >> Many apache projects have moved from JIRA to github issues > successfully, > > >> including Arrow, Airflow, Beam, Maven, Lucene ... Actually most of > apache > > >> projects are using github issues now, with a few exceptions including > spark. > > >> > > >> I'd like to hear more about this proposal from the community. > > >> > > >> Thanks! > > >> > > >> Tian Gao > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Bjørn Jørgensen > > Vestre Aspehaug 4, 6010 Ålesund > > Norge > > > > +47 480 94 297 > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected] > >
