Re: [DISCUSS] Issue Tracking - Jira or Github Issues

[Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com>]

Actually thinking a bit more, I think there is a bit inconvenient in
current approach (JIRA for issue tracking and PR for patches). Each time I
went to github for reviewing pull requests. I have to go back to JIRA (by
copying the JIRA id and typing the URL) to check the descriptions and
discussions. Moving to Github will make the life much easier.

- Sijie

On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't any documents at INFRA to point. I do observe more incubator
> projects are using Github Issues directly when they transfer to the ASF. I
> knew some of the projects are switching to use Github issues. For example,
> Traffic Server switches to Github Issues and makes their JIRA readonly at
> the beginning of this year.
>
> The preference is up to projects, I believe.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I have seen some large projects relying on Github Issues, Docker being
>> one of them. I have recently been using it in the Pravega project and I do
>> find that it doesn't offer right up front some of the features that jira
>> offers. For example, it doesn't give you the ability of creating a
>> workflow, although what we have done and have seen others doing it to
>> create labels to represent steps of a workflow. We ended up overloading the
>> use of labels, but it looks decent with the colors and such.
>>
>> I also find a bit confusing the relationship between issues and pull
>> requests at times. We have been trying to enforce that each pull request
>> requires at least one issue, but sometimes it feels unnatural because you
>> also have space for a description and the ability to comment in a pull
>> request.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the story is for github issues and apache infra,
>> though. The information I have is the same as Bobby's. Does anyone have a
>> pointer?
>>
>> -Flavio
>>
>> > On 26 May 2017, at 17:06, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Apache does have a requirement that community discussions and
>> especially votes are stored on apache servers.  This is often done by
>> linking different systems together (like pull requests to JIRA) or by
>> having a fire-hose of changes from the external system sent to some apache
>> mailing list that it can archive.
>> > I have not used github issues much but from what I have done it does
>> not look even close to being as full featured as JIRA. So my vote would be
>> to ask people to use JIRA, but not ignore the github issues.
>> >
>> > - Bobby
>> >
>> > On Friday, May 26, 2017, 9:57:43 AM CDT, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:Hi all,
>> >
>> > Currently we are using Jira for issue tracking and using Github for
>> > managing pull requests. For a new developer, he has to create two
>> accounts
>> > in order to engage with BookKeeper community. I am thinking - shall we
>> also
>> > move the issue tracking to use Github Issues (which I believe Apache
>> Infra
>> > supports that now)? So most of the development activities will happen in
>> > Github.
>> >
>> > Another reason I asked this - I saw a Github issue was created.
>> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/165 I believe we somehow
>> > requested to change the permissions to allow creating Github issues
>> before.
>> >
>> > Any thoughts?
>> >
>> > - Sijie
>>
>>
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Issue Tracking - Jira or Github Issues

[Matteo Merli <mm...@apache.org>]

To add more context, this topic was discussed recently at ApacheCon.

See this talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWurOHvm5WM
Relevant portion start at 18:00.

In short, they are saying that the
ASF is trying to leverage Github more and more in the future.

Matteo

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 4:48 PM Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the biggest advantage is JIRA has very good workflow management.
> Github issues doesn't have such feature. But projects like docker, k8s are
> using labels for such management. I think more and more large projects (non
> ASF) are using Github for both issues, pull requests and code. They might
> already have good practices, which we probably can learn and iterate from
> there to get rid of it.
>
> For example, the practice from moby (docker) -
> https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/project/ISSUE-TRIAGE.md
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri <
> jujjuri@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree, having one place is more convenient. But what is the feature
> > parity between Jira and Github?
> > Here is what I found by googling.
> > https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/PMC/
> > Github+Issues+vs+Jira+pros+and+cons
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Actually thinking a bit more, I think there is a bit inconvenient in
> > > current approach (JIRA for issue tracking and PR for patches). Each
> time
> > I
> > > went to github for reviewing pull requests. I have to go back to JIRA
> (by
> > > copying the JIRA id and typing the URL) to check the descriptions and
> > > discussions. Moving to Github will make the life much easier.
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I don't any documents at INFRA to point. I do observe more incubator
> > > > projects are using Github Issues directly when they transfer to the
> > ASF.
> > > I
> > > > knew some of the projects are switching to use Github issues. For
> > > example,
> > > > Traffic Server switches to Github Issues and makes their JIRA
> readonly
> > at
> > > > the beginning of this year.
> > > >
> > > > The preference is up to projects, I believe.
> > > >
> > > > - Sijie
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I have seen some large projects relying on Github Issues, Docker
> being
> > > >> one of them. I have recently been using it in the Pravega project
> and
> > I
> > > do
> > > >> find that it doesn't offer right up front some of the features that
> > jira
> > > >> offers. For example, it doesn't give you the ability of creating a
> > > >> workflow, although what we have done and have seen others doing it
> to
> > > >> create labels to represent steps of a workflow. We ended up
> > overloading
> > > the
> > > >> use of labels, but it looks decent with the colors and such.
> > > >>
> > > >> I also find a bit confusing the relationship between issues and pull
> > > >> requests at times. We have been trying to enforce that each pull
> > request
> > > >> requires at least one issue, but sometimes it feels unnatural
> because
> > > you
> > > >> also have space for a description and the ability to comment in a
> pull
> > > >> request.
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm not sure what the story is for github issues and apache infra,
> > > >> though. The information I have is the same as Bobby's. Does anyone
> > have
> > > a
> > > >> pointer?
> > > >>
> > > >> -Flavio
> > > >>
> > > >> > On 26 May 2017, at 17:06, Bobby Evans <evans@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID
> >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Apache does have a requirement that community discussions and
> > > >> especially votes are stored on apache servers.  This is often done
> by
> > > >> linking different systems together (like pull requests to JIRA) or
> by
> > > >> having a fire-hose of changes from the external system sent to some
> > > apache
> > > >> mailing list that it can archive.
> > > >> > I have not used github issues much but from what I have done it
> does
> > > >> not look even close to being as full featured as JIRA. So my vote
> > would
> > > be
> > > >> to ask people to use JIRA, but not ignore the github issues.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > - Bobby
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Friday, May 26, 2017, 9:57:43 AM CDT, Sijie Guo <
> > > guosijie@gmail.com>
> > > >> wrote:Hi all,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Currently we are using Jira for issue tracking and using Github
> for
> > > >> > managing pull requests. For a new developer, he has to create two
> > > >> accounts
> > > >> > in order to engage with BookKeeper community. I am thinking -
> shall
> > we
> > > >> also
> > > >> > move the issue tracking to use Github Issues (which I believe
> Apache
> > > >> Infra
> > > >> > supports that now)? So most of the development activities will
> > happen
> > > in
> > > >> > Github.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Another reason I asked this - I saw a Github issue was created.
> > > >> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/165 I believe we
> > somehow
> > > >> > requested to change the permissions to allow creating Github
> issues
> > > >> before.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Any thoughts?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > - Sijie
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jvrao
> > ---
> > First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
> > you win. - Mahatma Gandhi
> >
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Issue Tracking - Jira or Github Issues

[Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com>]

I think the biggest advantage is JIRA has very good workflow management.
Github issues doesn't have such feature. But projects like docker, k8s are
using labels for such management. I think more and more large projects (non
ASF) are using Github for both issues, pull requests and code. They might
already have good practices, which we probably can learn and iterate from
there to get rid of it.

For example, the practice from moby (docker) -
https://github.com/moby/moby/blob/master/project/ISSUE-TRIAGE.md

- Sijie

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 3:43 PM, Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri <ju...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I agree, having one place is more convenient. But what is the feature
> parity between Jira and Github?
> Here is what I found by googling.
> https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/PMC/
> Github+Issues+vs+Jira+pros+and+cons
>
> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually thinking a bit more, I think there is a bit inconvenient in
> > current approach (JIRA for issue tracking and PR for patches). Each time
> I
> > went to github for reviewing pull requests. I have to go back to JIRA (by
> > copying the JIRA id and typing the URL) to check the descriptions and
> > discussions. Moving to Github will make the life much easier.
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't any documents at INFRA to point. I do observe more incubator
> > > projects are using Github Issues directly when they transfer to the
> ASF.
> > I
> > > knew some of the projects are switching to use Github issues. For
> > example,
> > > Traffic Server switches to Github Issues and makes their JIRA readonly
> at
> > > the beginning of this year.
> > >
> > > The preference is up to projects, I believe.
> > >
> > > - Sijie
> > >
> > > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I have seen some large projects relying on Github Issues, Docker being
> > >> one of them. I have recently been using it in the Pravega project and
> I
> > do
> > >> find that it doesn't offer right up front some of the features that
> jira
> > >> offers. For example, it doesn't give you the ability of creating a
> > >> workflow, although what we have done and have seen others doing it to
> > >> create labels to represent steps of a workflow. We ended up
> overloading
> > the
> > >> use of labels, but it looks decent with the colors and such.
> > >>
> > >> I also find a bit confusing the relationship between issues and pull
> > >> requests at times. We have been trying to enforce that each pull
> request
> > >> requires at least one issue, but sometimes it feels unnatural because
> > you
> > >> also have space for a description and the ability to comment in a pull
> > >> request.
> > >>
> > >> I'm not sure what the story is for github issues and apache infra,
> > >> though. The information I have is the same as Bobby's. Does anyone
> have
> > a
> > >> pointer?
> > >>
> > >> -Flavio
> > >>
> > >> > On 26 May 2017, at 17:06, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Apache does have a requirement that community discussions and
> > >> especially votes are stored on apache servers.  This is often done by
> > >> linking different systems together (like pull requests to JIRA) or by
> > >> having a fire-hose of changes from the external system sent to some
> > apache
> > >> mailing list that it can archive.
> > >> > I have not used github issues much but from what I have done it does
> > >> not look even close to being as full featured as JIRA. So my vote
> would
> > be
> > >> to ask people to use JIRA, but not ignore the github issues.
> > >> >
> > >> > - Bobby
> > >> >
> > >> > On Friday, May 26, 2017, 9:57:43 AM CDT, Sijie Guo <
> > guosijie@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:Hi all,
> > >> >
> > >> > Currently we are using Jira for issue tracking and using Github for
> > >> > managing pull requests. For a new developer, he has to create two
> > >> accounts
> > >> > in order to engage with BookKeeper community. I am thinking - shall
> we
> > >> also
> > >> > move the issue tracking to use Github Issues (which I believe Apache
> > >> Infra
> > >> > supports that now)? So most of the development activities will
> happen
> > in
> > >> > Github.
> > >> >
> > >> > Another reason I asked this - I saw a Github issue was created.
> > >> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/165 I believe we
> somehow
> > >> > requested to change the permissions to allow creating Github issues
> > >> before.
> > >> >
> > >> > Any thoughts?
> > >> >
> > >> > - Sijie
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Jvrao
> ---
> First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
> you win. - Mahatma Gandhi
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Issue Tracking - Jira or Github Issues

[Venkateswara Rao Jujjuri <ju...@gmail.com>]

I agree, having one place is more convenient. But what is the feature
parity between Jira and Github?
Here is what I found by googling.
https://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/PMC/Github+Issues+vs+Jira+pros+and+cons

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Actually thinking a bit more, I think there is a bit inconvenient in
> current approach (JIRA for issue tracking and PR for patches). Each time I
> went to github for reviewing pull requests. I have to go back to JIRA (by
> copying the JIRA id and typing the URL) to check the descriptions and
> discussions. Moving to Github will make the life much easier.
>
> - Sijie
>
> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:54 AM, Sijie Guo <gu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't any documents at INFRA to point. I do observe more incubator
> > projects are using Github Issues directly when they transfer to the ASF.
> I
> > knew some of the projects are switching to use Github issues. For
> example,
> > Traffic Server switches to Github Issues and makes their JIRA readonly at
> > the beginning of this year.
> >
> > The preference is up to projects, I believe.
> >
> > - Sijie
> >
> > On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Flavio Junqueira <fp...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> >> I have seen some large projects relying on Github Issues, Docker being
> >> one of them. I have recently been using it in the Pravega project and I
> do
> >> find that it doesn't offer right up front some of the features that jira
> >> offers. For example, it doesn't give you the ability of creating a
> >> workflow, although what we have done and have seen others doing it to
> >> create labels to represent steps of a workflow. We ended up overloading
> the
> >> use of labels, but it looks decent with the colors and such.
> >>
> >> I also find a bit confusing the relationship between issues and pull
> >> requests at times. We have been trying to enforce that each pull request
> >> requires at least one issue, but sometimes it feels unnatural because
> you
> >> also have space for a description and the ability to comment in a pull
> >> request.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure what the story is for github issues and apache infra,
> >> though. The information I have is the same as Bobby's. Does anyone have
> a
> >> pointer?
> >>
> >> -Flavio
> >>
> >> > On 26 May 2017, at 17:06, Bobby Evans <ev...@yahoo-inc.com.INVALID>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Apache does have a requirement that community discussions and
> >> especially votes are stored on apache servers.  This is often done by
> >> linking different systems together (like pull requests to JIRA) or by
> >> having a fire-hose of changes from the external system sent to some
> apache
> >> mailing list that it can archive.
> >> > I have not used github issues much but from what I have done it does
> >> not look even close to being as full featured as JIRA. So my vote would
> be
> >> to ask people to use JIRA, but not ignore the github issues.
> >> >
> >> > - Bobby
> >> >
> >> > On Friday, May 26, 2017, 9:57:43 AM CDT, Sijie Guo <
> guosijie@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > Currently we are using Jira for issue tracking and using Github for
> >> > managing pull requests. For a new developer, he has to create two
> >> accounts
> >> > in order to engage with BookKeeper community. I am thinking - shall we
> >> also
> >> > move the issue tracking to use Github Issues (which I believe Apache
> >> Infra
> >> > supports that now)? So most of the development activities will happen
> in
> >> > Github.
> >> >
> >> > Another reason I asked this - I saw a Github issue was created.
> >> > https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/issues/165 I believe we somehow
> >> > requested to change the permissions to allow creating Github issues
> >> before.
> >> >
> >> > Any thoughts?
> >> >
> >> > - Sijie
> >>
> >>
> >
>



-- 
Jvrao
---
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
you win. - Mahatma Gandhi