Robbie/JB-
Good calls outs, thanks! I did not mean to skew into contribution guide as far
as I did. I will take a pass at cleaning up.
Thanks,
Matt
> On Apr 16, 2024, at 11:56 AM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>
> The security bits are also detailed in all the repositories already by
> default at
Hi JB-
Yep, thanks for calling that out. When I indicated ‘security mailing list’ I
should have been more clear to say ’secur...@apache.org’, to remove ambiguity
that I was referring to an ActiveMQ mailing list.
I’ll clean-up points on the Proposal thread.
Thanks!
Matt
> On Apr 16, 2024, at
Hi Bruce-
I don’t believe there is any intention to replace issue comments with comments
on a PR or vice versa.
My point is that the current process of using JIRA for issue discussion isn’t
really effective, and doesn’t serve a newer user base that is more familiar
with using GitHub vs JIRA.
Hi Matt,
Thanks for that.
If I may, I don't see a strong consensus yet about GH Issues. The
other thread you started contains some non accurate points (we should
have clear statements to the community for clarity).
Regards
JB
On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 5:26 PM Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>
> @dev-
>
>
The security bits are also detailed in all the repositories already by
default at the org level, e.g
https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/?tab=security-ov-file (or
repositories can define their own policy, e.g
https://github.com/apache/activemq/?tab=security-ov-file#readme ).
Though we can
Hi Matt
Imho, we are mixing two topics here:
1. The ticket management system
2. The contribution guide
So, let me try to clarify:
[PROPOSAL]
I'm in favor of GH Issues, but we don't yet have a strong consensus
about that. I would propose a new thread about that to give a chance
to anyone to
I'm not really going to add much in this thread that I didnt already
in the other thread, especially given I'd prefer to stick to JIRA as
it is...though on one specific point below, that wasnt mentioned in
the other thread that I recall...
"Update-3. Provide a link for users to submit a CLA"
I am not convinced that we should replace Jira with Github issues. Based on
the info gathered and the discussions thus far, I believe such a change
would cause significant confusion for our users. As noted previously, there
is a significant difference between the purposes for a Jira issue vs.
@dev-
I appreciate all the good feedback and discussion. A number of good points,
suggestions and perspectives. Overall, I see an uptick in community interest in
contributing to ActiveMQ and that’s a great thing! I believe that modernizing
the toolkit, reducing contribution friction and
@dev-
I’m summarizing the good points here and starting [PROPOSAL] thread to draft up
potential next steps.
Thanks,
Matt
> On Apr 16, 2024, at 9:58 AM, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>
> Robbie-
>
> One option with GH issues is we can have them prompted with a ’type’ (for
> example, an issue or
Robbie-
One option with GH issues is we can have them prompted with a ’type’ (for
example, an issue or security report). Security report workflow could take them
to the readme with email link to direct users to the mailing list and
(hopefully) getting better adherence to the requested security
11 matches
Mail list logo
