+1 (non binding) for github issue. It'd be great to reduce the small but continuous duplicate work to fill out information in the JIRA and github issue/pr for every contribution. For new users, it also does seem a pain to request the JIRA account , and for PMC to approve each one.
Thanks Szehon On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:52 AM Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > It'd be super confusing to people that are not using these day to day to > see both. Where should they be reporting bugs? Where should they search? If > there are duplications, there's not even a structured way to link them. > > I would imagine that if github issues are available, normal users would > just use that to report bugs. It does not quite make sense for them to go > to JIRA to report stuff if they can just do it on github. Searching is an > issue if we do not sync both sources. That's an advantage for a > full migration (or no migration at all). Still, I think we should > eventually move to github (if we start from scratch, will we use github > issues or JIRA?). > > Also interesting thoughts about linking - github supports bidirectional > links once you mention a PR/issue in another. JIRA kind of supports this to > github PRs, but requires a bot. The nice thing about the github links is > that it also supports preview and popup in their UI (well it's native). > > My belief is to migrate to github issues and give up JIRA, but I > understand that people have concerns about benefit vs cost, so I think an > intermediate phase to have both could be helpful to the eventual goal. > > Tian Gao > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:40 AM Gengliang Wang <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I checked the 2025 data: out of 492 ASF JIRA account requests for Spark, >> only *34* were rejected. Most requests were reviewed and approved—often >> on the same day—by Sean Owen ([email protected]). >> >> I don’t have data on how many approved accounts eventually filed a JIRA. >> >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:28 AM Tian Gao <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> Do we have a stat about how many of them are approved and how many >>> approved accounts made at least 1 JIRA? >>> >>> We know the current flow is: >>> >>> Desire to contribute -> Find out need to use JIRA -> Go to JIRA -> >>> Realize they need an account -> Request for account -> Wait for approval -> >>> Submit JIRA ticket -> Do a PR... >>> >>> For each step in this flow, we are losing contributors. As we already >>> host our repo on github, we can safely assume most of the desired >>> contributors are familiar with github workflow, then the workflow could be >>> >>> Desire to contribute -> submit an issue -> do a PR. >>> >>> From my experience in open source projects, contributor's desire to >>> contribute fades fast when they hit blockers, especially procedural issues. >>> >>> Tian Gao >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:14 AM Gengliang Wang <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I did a quick check and found that there were *492* new ASF Spark JIRA >>>> account creation requests in 2025. The extra step of requesting a JIRA >>>> account can still be a meaningful barrier—especially for contributors who >>>> are already active on GitHub but less familiar with ASF workflows. >>>> >>>> +1 to maintaining both ASF JIRA and GitHub Issues. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 11:09 AM Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> First of all, I believe the merge script is another issue that is >>>>> worth discussing but not strictly involved in this proposal. I was talking >>>>> about potential future benefits for the merge script by migrating our work >>>>> to github. On this specific matter, like I said, a github bot would >>>>> probably be better than a manual script - we should be able to do whatever >>>>> we do with that. The good thing is we can just label the PR (auto-merge) >>>>> (or a specific comment like bot merge) and run the bot, instead of setting >>>>> up a local environment. >>>>> >>>>> Back to the real topic. I don't think we should keep two systems >>>>> stamping on each other in the long term. But we have a puzzle that we'll >>>>> never solve if we bind all PRs to JIRA - how many more contributors we >>>>> will >>>>> have if it's easier for them to contribute code? I don't have a definitive >>>>> answer for that and that's what I want to find out. I think the existing >>>>> committers will benefit some from a successful migration, but the real >>>>> motivation is for people who are not familiar with JIRA or who can't/don't >>>>> want to use JIRA. If we can get a significant boost of our community >>>>> contribution, I'd say that's worth the trouble. I think many of us are >>>>> thinking about this from a committer's perspective (which is natural >>>>> obviously), but I was a new contributor 6 months ago and the first thing >>>>> that stopped me from contributing was the allowed-user-only JIRA. >>>>> >>>>> People may argue that almost all recent contributions are from >>>>> committers or regular contributors and they are already familiar with JIRA >>>>> - that's true, but isn't that also evidence that we should embrace the >>>>> community a bit more? >>>>> >>>>> I think if we support a dual-rail system - it should be an >>>>> intermediate phase where we observe if it's worth it for us to migrate to >>>>> github issues. If so, it gives us some time to build infra around github >>>>> issues while keeping the workflow going. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, it's possible that this is just some fantasy I have and we >>>>> don't get observably more new contributions from the community with github >>>>> issues, then we can just use it as a discussion board and feedback >>>>> channel. >>>>> >>>>> Tian Gao >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 5:07 AM Jungtaek Lim < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> The only downside I can think of is future release notes will contain >>>>>>> mixed items from Github Issues and JIRAs. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure I think this is trivial. IMHO if we want to maintain two >>>>>> systems altogether, each system should serve its purpose and not >>>>>> interleave. >>>>>> >>>>>> For example, allowing Github issues to be an easy entry point for >>>>>> questions, making Github issues to serve the major purpose of users@ >>>>>> instead of drop-in replacement of JIRA. And for code contributions we >>>>>> still >>>>>> require JIRA tickets. This strictly scopes the purpose of both systems. >>>>>> >>>>>> It doesn't mean I prefer maintaining two systems; I mean let's not >>>>>> leave both systems to be active for the same purpose which will bug us in >>>>>> future. I don't have a strong opinion to pick one system over another, >>>>>> but >>>>>> I have an opinion that we shouldn't end up with compromise and >>>>>> make the infra to be a weird state. >>>>>> >>>>>> Btw I'm not sure Github's squeeze commit in the UI page is a drop-in >>>>>> replacement of the merge script e.g. the merge script handles the tricky >>>>>> authorship issue via listing up lead-author and co-authors based on the >>>>>> author of commits before squeezing. I don't know whether it's supported. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 4:07 PM Wenchen Fan <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> +1 to maintain both. Why not give contributors a new option with >>>>>>> Github Issues? All we need to do is to allow people to create PRs with >>>>>>> link >>>>>>> to Github Issues, in addition to JIRAs. The only downside I can think >>>>>>> of is >>>>>>> future release notes will contain mixed items from Github Issues and >>>>>>> JIRAs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 7:22 AM Lisa N. Cao < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It would make it easier for the community to see the progress of >>>>>>>> features, but there is some work involved to maintain both. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> LNC >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 3:10 PM Tian Gao via dev < >>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 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] >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>
