+1 binding
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 2:06 PM Cesar Hernandez wrote:
> +1 (non-binding) thank you!
>
> El mié, 3 abr 2024 a las 11:31, Matt Pavlovich ()
> escribió:
>
> > +1 (binding)
> >
> > - Reviewed PRs and JIRA issues
> > - Downloaded dist tar.gz and exercised the broker
> >
> > Thanks JB!
> >
I am also on the Accumulo PMC and on that project we use Github issues
and no longer use Jira. This switch was made before my time so I'm not
sure of the reasoning. Personally, I don't really care too much either
way as I've used both but I will just point out 2 things from my
experience with it.
> On Apr 4, 2024, at 1:26 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> To the later point around Discussions, I do think enabling those could
> be good either way since, just like with Jira, people will often
> create Issues to ask questions rather than e.g mail a mailing list.
> They might use a Discussion
I prefer Jira for issue tracking, I think it's better at it,
particularly for cases like 5.x / 6.x having multiple active release
streams with lots of backports, given the limitations of Milestone
handling and how people tend to treat xref'ing to fully compensate for
that (i.e they often dont
On Wed, 3 Apr 2024 at 21:14, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>
> Hello @dev-
>
> I argue that we are effectively already using GitHub for issues, JIRA is just
> getting a back-port sync of the discussion. The reality is that code-change
> discussions are occurring on the PRs, not in JIRA or mailing
Hi Justin,
GitHub Issues discussion is interesting for the board, but I would
like more discussions between us.
Regards
JB
On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 4:45 PM Justin Bertram wrote:
>
> I added detail about Artemis based on JB's draft.
>
> I wondered if we might add a note about the fact we're
I added detail about Artemis based on JB's draft.
I wondered if we might add a note about the fact we're considering moving
to GitHub Issues, but I wasn't sure that's something the board would care
about, and I wasn't sure where to add it.
Justin
On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 8:56 AM Jean-Baptiste
Hi Bruce,
I created a new draft (based on yours) containing ActiveMQ "classic" details.
Regards
JB
On Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 3:48 PM Bruce Snyder wrote:
>
> Hi folks,
>
> It is that time once again to assemble the latest ASF board report. As
> mentioned previously, I would like us to begin using
