Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Beckerle, Mike]

FYI: a pretty interesting going discussion on users@infra that I am on a CC 
trail about using github issues vs. Apache JIRA, and the experience of Apache 
Airflow in switching to GH.


From: Jarek Potiuk 
Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2021 7:13 AM
To: Juan Pablo Santos Rodríguez 
Cc: Beckerle, Mike ; us...@infra.apache.org 

Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

* Did you export / import the jira issues to github?

We initially thought about that and even started doing it, but eventually we 
decided not to do that and "leave" the JIRA issues behind. We moved some 
"important" ones and then we informed everyone and asked for help with that in 
devlist/userlist/slack etc. that if they are still interested in their issue - 
they can copy them over. And we keep info about it in our README for quite a 
while.  A lot of people did.

I personally think this is a really great way to engage with the community and 
ask them to help. We have to remember that as committers and PMC members we do 
not have to do everything ourselves - we can always reach out to our community 
for help. And it worked really nicely. Those authors of issues who did not do 
this were apparently not interested any more, or maybe they did not follow the 
issues they created, or maybe the issues were gone already (or even if they 
were real issues there was no-one to verify them) so we let the issues "rot" 
there.

That was a very good choice. A lot of issues we had in jira were already 
out-dated or of poor quality, so that automatically cleaned up the state of our 
issues. I personally think that if it is not obvious that an issue is really 
important and if the author of the issue is not interested in adding extra 
information if asked or if they are not following  up with them - they are 
better if they are "forgotten". They add no value to the project, they only add 
"noise". This is why I love GitHub discussions so much.  We can convert the 
issue to GitHub Discussion if we look at it and it is likely the issue is 
caused by user error, deployment issue etc. This does not "close" the issue 
(which is quite mean) - but it moves the "responsibility" for the discussion to 
continue on the author - it's a very clear sign that the discussion might be 
left in the state of "discussing it" and there is no intention or expectation 
that it will be fixed. And we can always create an issue from the discussion if 
we get to the conclusion this is a real issue. This already happened in the 
past.

** if so, how? I've found several articles/projects ([#1], [#2], [#3], [#4], 
[#5]) but they all seem to be customized to specific projects needs..

See above. We crowdsourced it by asking the authors to move the issues to GH 
:D. Not a "tool", but it was a great choice for user engagement, community 
building, etc.

** how an issue assigned to several fix versions is translated to gh issues? 
Was any markdown conversion between jira and gh done (issue descriptions, 
comments)?

See above. ^^ :).

** If not, how do you handle the issues on the jira side?

We just closed JIRA issues for entry and I think we left a comment in CWIKI 
space which we used much more then, that the GH issues are now being used.

* How do you deal with security reports inside github issues?

We have those really nice templates for GitHub Issues as of recently (this is 
another benefit of GH Issues - they have those really nicely working Issue 
Forms - which do a FANTASTIC job to make our issues much more quality issues - 
for example in the forms we instruct the users that if they have no 
reproducible steps, they should open GitHub Discussion instead - this already 
happened multiple times). One of the options in the issue form configuration is 
to provide a "BUTTON" instead of form for some types of issues which link to an 
external site. We have a link there to the security pollicy 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/security/policy  which clearly states that no 
GH issues should be opened, but the regular ASF security process should be 
followed (with the email to securty@a.o).

I HEARTILY recommend to introduce well thought and prepared issue forms when 
you move to GH issues. We already see tremendous improvement in the quality of 
reported issues, and a lot more GitHub discussions opened up instead of issues. 
The nice things about those forms is that they introduce a bit of "friction". 
It's not just copy or type your frustration - you HAVE TO choose version 
of Airflow, you HAVE TO describe your OS, you HAVE TO choose deployment - and 
if you did not respond to reproducibility steps, there is a clear "No response 
was given to that" in your issue which in VAST majority of cases immediately 
qualifies the issue to be converted to discussion (which we often do) - 
especially that during issue entry we explicitly tell the users that "bugs 
without reproduction steps should be opened as discussions instead" - and we 
even have links 

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Mike Beckerle]

Yes, I think we should just go "all github" for the vscode debugger and see
what happens with it.



On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 12:01 PM Steve Lawrence 
wrote:

> Related, do we also want to enable the GitHub wiki and project
> management boards, with the possibility of migrating the current
> confluence wiki to GitHub as well depending on how we like it?
>
> I.e. the change to the vscode .asf.yml file would be:
>
> github:
>features:
>  wiki: true
>  issues:   true
>  projects: true
>
>
> On 9/23/21 11:50 AM, Beckerle, Mike wrote:
> > (sorry if you get this twice. A few email difficulties of late. I'm
> switching email systems for Apache email.)
> >
> > I think we have a pretty good consensus that we should go with github
> > issues for VSCode debugger, and I think steve lawrence's point that we
> can
> > view this as a trial and maybe migrate regular daffodil to it eventually
> is
> > well taken also.
> >
> > I do use JIRA's reports sometimes. Like the open-close graph they have
> > which shows trend of opening vs. closing tickets. Github may or may not
> > have that sort of reporting. But it's not critical.
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:32 AM Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) <
> > john.interra...@ge.com> wrote:
> >
> >> +1 for using GitHub issues in Apache's VSCode Debugger repo.
> >>
> >> -Original Message-----
> >> From: Beckerle, Mike 
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:30 AM
> >> To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
> >> Subject: EXT: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache
> JIRA
> >> vs. github "issues"
> >>
> >> So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
> >> issues.
> >>
> >> I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is
> below.
> >> Apache Airflow uses github issues)
> >>
> >> The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
> >> JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.
> >>
> >> For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its
> issues
> >> into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.
> >>
> >> There are pros and cons to this.
> >>
> >> I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
> >> use github issues instead.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> -mikeb
> >>
> >> 
> >> From: Jarek Potiuk 
> >> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
> >> To: Beckerle, Mike 
> >> Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
> >> Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"
> >>
> >> It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH
> in
> >> Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.
> >>
> >> And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
> >> Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
> >> GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience
> but
> >> this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
> >> whole Airflow community).
> >>
> >> I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
> >> JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
> >> NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
> >> missed JIRA. Not by far.
> >>
> >> That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
> >> contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to
> run
> >> the project with JIRA.
> >>
> >> The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage
> JIRA
> >> issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
> >> unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
> >> tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
> >> world of difference.
> >>
> >> Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability
> to
> >> convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.
> >>
> >> J.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
> >> mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com<mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>>
> >> wrote:
> >> I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.
> >>
> >> I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of
> github,
> >> for an Apache project repo.
> >>
> >> Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA?
> Is
> >> there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Mike Beckerle
> >> Apache Daffodil PMC
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Steve Lawrence]

Related, do we also want to enable the GitHub wiki and project 
management boards, with the possibility of migrating the current 
confluence wiki to GitHub as well depending on how we like it?


I.e. the change to the vscode .asf.yml file would be:

github:
  features:
wiki: true
issues:   true
projects: true


On 9/23/21 11:50 AM, Beckerle, Mike wrote:

(sorry if you get this twice. A few email difficulties of late. I'm switching 
email systems for Apache email.)

I think we have a pretty good consensus that we should go with github
issues for VSCode debugger, and I think steve lawrence's point that we can
view this as a trial and maybe migrate regular daffodil to it eventually is
well taken also.

I do use JIRA's reports sometimes. Like the open-close graph they have
which shows trend of opening vs. closing tickets. Github may or may not
have that sort of reporting. But it's not critical.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:32 AM Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) <
john.interra...@ge.com> wrote:


+1 for using GitHub issues in Apache's VSCode Debugger repo.

-Original Message-
From: Beckerle, Mike 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:30 AM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: EXT: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA
vs. github "issues"

So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
issues.

I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below.
Apache Airflow uses github issues)

The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.

For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues
into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.

There are pros and cons to this.

I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
use github issues instead.

Thoughts?

-mikeb


From: Jarek Potiuk 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
To: Beckerle, Mike 
Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in
Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.

And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience but
this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
whole Airflow community).

I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
missed JIRA. Not by far.

That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run
the project with JIRA.

The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA
issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
world of difference.

Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to
convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.

J.


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com<mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>>
wrote:
I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.

I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github,
for an Apache project repo.

Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is
there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?

Thanks

Mike Beckerle
Apache Daffodil PMC

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Beckerle, Mike]

(sorry if you get this twice. A few email difficulties of late. I'm switching 
email systems for Apache email.)

I think we have a pretty good consensus that we should go with github
issues for VSCode debugger, and I think steve lawrence's point that we can
view this as a trial and maybe migrate regular daffodil to it eventually is
well taken also.

I do use JIRA's reports sometimes. Like the open-close graph they have
which shows trend of opening vs. closing tickets. Github may or may not
have that sort of reporting. But it's not critical.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:32 AM Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) <
john.interra...@ge.com> wrote:

> +1 for using GitHub issues in Apache's VSCode Debugger repo.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Beckerle, Mike 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:30 AM
> To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
> Subject: EXT: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA
> vs. github "issues"
>
> So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
> issues.
>
> I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below.
> Apache Airflow uses github issues)
>
> The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
> JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.
>
> For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues
> into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.
>
> There are pros and cons to this.
>
> I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
> use github issues instead.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -mikeb
>
> 
> From: Jarek Potiuk 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
> To: Beckerle, Mike 
> Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"
>
> It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in
> Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.
>
> And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
> Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
> GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience but
> this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
> whole Airflow community).
>
> I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
> JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
> NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
> missed JIRA. Not by far.
>
> That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
> contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run
> the project with JIRA.
>
> The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA
> issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
> unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
> tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
> world of difference.
>
> Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to
> convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
> mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com<mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>>
> wrote:
> I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.
>
> I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github,
> for an Apache project repo.
>
> Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is
> there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Beckerle
> Apache Daffodil PMC
>
>
>
>

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Mike Beckerle]

I think we have a pretty good consensus that we should go with github
issues for VSCode debugger, and I think steve lawrence's point that we can
view this as a trial and maybe migrate regular daffodil to it eventually is
well taken also.

I do use JIRA's reports sometimes. Like the open-close graph they have
which shows trend of opening vs. closing tickets. Github may or may not
have that sort of reporting. But it's not critical.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 11:32 AM Interrante, John A (GE Research, US) <
john.interra...@ge.com> wrote:

> +1 for using GitHub issues in Apache's VSCode Debugger repo.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Beckerle, Mike 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:30 AM
> To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
> Subject: EXT: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA
> vs. github "issues"
>
> So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
> issues.
>
> I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below.
> Apache Airflow uses github issues)
>
> The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
> JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.
>
> For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues
> into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.
>
> There are pros and cons to this.
>
> I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
> use github issues instead.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -mikeb
>
> 
> From: Jarek Potiuk 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
> To: Beckerle, Mike 
> Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"
>
> It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in
> Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.
>
> And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
> Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
> GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience but
> this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
> whole Airflow community).
>
> I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
> JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
> NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
> missed JIRA. Not by far.
>
> That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
> contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run
> the project with JIRA.
>
> The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA
> issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
> unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
> tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
> world of difference.
>
> Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to
> convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
> mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com<mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>>
> wrote:
> I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.
>
> I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github,
> for an Apache project repo.
>
> Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is
> there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Beckerle
> Apache Daffodil PMC
>
>
>
>

RE: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Interrante, John A (GE Research, US)]

+1 for using GitHub issues in Apache's VSCode Debugger repo.

-Original Message-
From: Beckerle, Mike  
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:30 AM
To: dev@daffodil.apache.org
Subject: EXT: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. 
github "issues"

So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github issues.

I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below. 
Apache Airflow uses github issues)

The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using JIRA. I'm 
not suggesting we consider switching that.

For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues into 
the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.

There are pros and cons to this.

I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just use 
github issues instead.

Thoughts?

-mikeb


From: Jarek Potiuk 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
To: Beckerle, Mike 
Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in 
Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.

And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub Issues at 
its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to GitHub issues when 
they matured. Others might have different experience but this is ours (and I am 
pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much whole Airflow community).

I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using JIRA 
in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we NEVER 
looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one missed JIRA. 
Not by far.

That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and contributor's 
engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run the project with 
JIRA.

The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA 
issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely 
unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change tracking" 
based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole world of 
difference.

Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to 
convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.

J.


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike 
mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>> wrote:
I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.

I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github, for 
an Apache project repo.

Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is 
there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?

Thanks

Mike Beckerle
Apache Daffodil PMC

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Adam Rosien]

+1 GitHub for the VSCode DAP debugger.

On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 7:29 AM Beckerle, Mike <
mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com> wrote:

> So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
> issues.
>
> I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below.
> Apache Airflow uses github issues)
>
> The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
> JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.
>
> For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues
> into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.
>
> There are pros and cons to this.
>
> I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
> use github issues instead.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -mikeb
>
> 
> From: Jarek Potiuk 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
> To: Beckerle, Mike 
> Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"
>
> It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in
> Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.
>
> And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
> Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
> GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience but
> this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
> whole Airflow community).
>
> I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
> JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
> NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
> missed JIRA. Not by far.
>
> That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
> contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run
> the project with JIRA.
>
> The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA
> issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
> unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
> tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
> world of difference.
>
> Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to
> convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
> mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>
> wrote:
> I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.
>
> I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github,
> for an Apache project repo.
>
> Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is
> there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Beckerle
> Apache Daffodil PMC
>
>
>
>

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[John Wass]

+1 for GitHub Issues

- gain conveniences by staying within GitHub
- avoid complexity involved with separating things
- better experience for new contributors


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 10:29 AM Beckerle, Mike <
mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com> wrote:

> So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github
> issues.
>
> I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below.
> Apache Airflow uses github issues)
>
> The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using
> JIRA. I'm not suggesting we consider switching that.
>
> For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues
> into the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.
>
> There are pros and cons to this.
>
> I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just
> use github issues instead.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -mikeb
>
> 
> From: Jarek Potiuk 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
> To: Beckerle, Mike 
> Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"
>
> It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in
> Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.
>
> And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub
> Issues at its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to
> GitHub issues when they matured. Others might have different experience but
> this is ours (and I am pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much
> whole Airflow community).
>
> I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using
> JIRA in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we
> NEVER looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one
> missed JIRA. Not by far.
>
> That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and
> contributor's engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run
> the project with JIRA.
>
> The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA
> issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely
> unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change
> tracking" based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole
> world of difference.
>
> Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to
> convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.
>
> J.
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike <
> mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>
> wrote:
> I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.
>
> I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github,
> for an Apache project repo.
>
> Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is
> there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike Beckerle
> Apache Daffodil PMC
>
>
>
>

Re: github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Steve Lawrence]

I have a slight preference towards keeping everything in the same bug 
tracker, but only like a +0.1 vote. I imagine mixing issues wouldn't be 
a big deal since we could set the component to something like "VSCode" 
so issues could be easily filtered.


That said, I actually think GitHub issues might be better. I think its 
interface is a bit cleaner, people familiar with GitHub could easily 
find our issues, and it's where most of our development already happens 
so integration is clear.


I know you weren't suggesting it, but maybe it is worth considering 
migrating our JIRA issues to GitHub issues? It sounds like Airflow loves 
it, and I know GitHub recently announced "the new GitHub issues" so its 
features might be comparable. I'm sure there's a script to migrate Jira 
issues to GitHub somewhere.


If people are open to that, maybe it makes sense to use issues for 
VSCode as a sort of trial? If we do like it significantly more than JIRA 
we can look into migrating our existing issues? And if it turns out we 
hate GitHub issues, we can always migrate them to JIRA.



On 9/23/21 10:29 AM, Beckerle, Mike wrote:

So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github issues.

I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below. 
Apache Airflow uses github issues)

The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using JIRA. I'm 
not suggesting we consider switching that.

For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues into 
the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.

There are pros and cons to this.

I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just use 
github issues instead.

Thoughts?

-mikeb


From: Jarek Potiuk 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
To: Beckerle, Mike 
Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in 
Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.

And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub Issues at 
its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to GitHub issues when 
they matured. Others might have different experience but this is ours (and I am 
pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much whole Airflow community).

I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using JIRA 
in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we NEVER 
looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one missed JIRA. 
Not by far.

That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and contributor's 
engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run the project with 
JIRA.

The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA issues, 
dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely unmanageable for us. With 
GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change tracking" based on PR# rather than 
Issue # optional and it made a whole world of difference.

Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to 
convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.

J.


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike 
mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>> wrote:
I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.

I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github, for 
an Apache project repo.

Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is 
there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?

Thanks

Mike Beckerle
Apache Daffodil PMC

github issues vs. JIRA for VSCode Debugger - Fw: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

[Beckerle, Mike]

So, I inquired about whether we need to use JIRA, or can just use github issues.

I got a reply basically saying we can do what we prefer. (reply is below. 
Apache Airflow uses github issues)

The regular Apache Daffodil repo has a pretty big investment in using JIRA. I'm 
not suggesting we consider switching that.

For VSCode, we could stick with using JIRA, but that would mix its issues into 
the ~390 other Apache Daffodil issues.

There are pros and cons to this.

I am wondering if for the VSCode repo (once established), we should just use 
github issues instead.

Thoughts?

-mikeb


From: Jarek Potiuk 
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 10:21 AM
To: Beckerle, Mike 
Cc: us...@infra.apache.org 
Subject: Re: Apache JIRA vs. github "issues"

It's quite OK to only use Github Issues/Discussions - we switched to GH in 
Apache Airflow ~ 2 years ago I think.

And a comment from our perspective of a big project that uses GitHub Issues at 
its inception, switched to JIRA and finally returned back to GitHub issues when 
they matured. Others might have different experience but this is ours (and I am 
pretty sure I am representing view of pretty much whole Airflow community).

I witnessed just the last switch - from JIRA to GitHub. We stopped using JIRA 
in Apache Airflow in favour of GitHub Issues and Discussions and we NEVER 
looked back. Not a minute. Not even a second. Absolutely no-one missed JIRA. 
Not by far.

That was such an amazing improvement in the overall workflow and contributor's 
engagement. I don't even imagine how we would be able to run the project with 
JIRA.

The overall experience, integration level, overhead needed to manage JIRA 
issues, dual-logging-in and syncing between the two were absolutely 
unmanageable for us. With GitHub Issues we chose to base our "change tracking" 
based on PR# rather than Issue # optional and it made a whole world of 
difference.

Especially recently with GithubDiscussions added to the mix and ability to 
convert issues into discussions (and back) if they are not real issues.

J.


On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 4:01 PM Beckerle, Mike 
mailto:mbecke...@owlcyberdefense.com>> wrote:
I read a old blog post from infra about increasing github integration.

I am wondering about Apache JIRA, vs. using the issues feature of github, for 
an Apache project repo.

Can we use github's issues feature, or do we have to use Apache's JIRA? Is 
there a policy, or even strong preference on this issue?

Thanks

Mike Beckerle
Apache Daffodil PMC