Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci>]

Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue tracking
to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to create
a ticket for this and implement it.

What needs to be done for Log4j?
- Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is mentioned
- See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions

[1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever necessary.

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Xeno Amess <xe...@gmail.com>]

+1 for to guthub issues.
well if people still care about jira we can try make a jira plugin to auto create jira issue for every pr.
But I really doubt if there be many people really love jira that much...
________________________________
From: Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 6, 2022 1:59:20 AM
To: Apache Logging Developers List <de...@logging.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

What I like best about switching to GitHub is dealing with fewer or zero
spam tickets.

I will also relay that I've had push back in the past from folks who refuse
to get a GitHub account in order to provide PRs.

I have no idea how we can integrate changes.xml with GitHub, maybe that's
something the Maven plugin already supports.

Gary

On Fri, Nov 4, 2022, 19:00 Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> I’d like to know how we can get GitHub issue links included into the
> release info. Can we continue to use changes.xml?
>
> How are we going to handle issues already in Jira? We currently have 898
> open issues. My guess is we will be lucky to ever get to 10% of them. But
> how do we lock down Jira while being able to work on those issues?
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Nov 4, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >
> > Usage on a phone is certainly a nice advantage for GH. Same with the MFA
> integration, though the ASF is working on integrating MFA with the rest of
> their offered services over time. And it does make it easier for users to
> submit issues now that Jira is restricted.
> >
> > We might want some method for people to submit bug reports who don’t
> want to use GitHub, though that doesn’t need to be too formal (maybe just
> emailing dev@).
> >
> >> On Nov 4, 2022, at 11:55 AM, Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
> >> It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
> >> My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
> >> Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.
> >>
> >> -ck
> >>
> >>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub
> Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We
> don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in
> GitHub.
> >>>
> >>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
> >>>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue
> tracking
> >>>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to
> create
> >>>> a ticket for this and implement it.
> >>>>
> >>>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
> >>>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is
> mentioned
> >>>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever
> necessary.
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>]

What I like best about switching to GitHub is dealing with fewer or zero
spam tickets.

I will also relay that I've had push back in the past from folks who refuse
to get a GitHub account in order to provide PRs.

I have no idea how we can integrate changes.xml with GitHub, maybe that's
something the Maven plugin already supports.

Gary

On Fri, Nov 4, 2022, 19:00 Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> I’d like to know how we can get GitHub issue links included into the
> release info. Can we continue to use changes.xml?
>
> How are we going to handle issues already in Jira? We currently have 898
> open issues. My guess is we will be lucky to ever get to 10% of them. But
> how do we lock down Jira while being able to work on those issues?
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Nov 4, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >
> > Usage on a phone is certainly a nice advantage for GH. Same with the MFA
> integration, though the ASF is working on integrating MFA with the rest of
> their offered services over time. And it does make it easier for users to
> submit issues now that Jira is restricted.
> >
> > We might want some method for people to submit bug reports who don’t
> want to use GitHub, though that doesn’t need to be too formal (maybe just
> emailing dev@).
> >
> >> On Nov 4, 2022, at 11:55 AM, Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
> >> It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
> >> My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
> >> Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.
> >>
> >> -ck
> >>
> >>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub
> Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We
> don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in
> GitHub.
> >>>
> >>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
> >>>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue
> tracking
> >>>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to
> create
> >>>> a ticket for this and implement it.
> >>>>
> >>>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
> >>>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is
> mentioned
> >>>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever
> necessary.
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci>]

Great questions Ralph! Let me address them:

> Can we continue to use changes.xml?

I propose switching to a custom changelog configuration. See LOG4J2-3628
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3628> that I have just
created.

> How are we going to handle issues already in Jira?

I say let's simply point everyone to GitHub Issues and make sure PMC uses
that too. Since JIRA will be closed to newcomers, I'd expect it to not
receive much changes and become almost frozen over time. Note that the
changelog configuration I have proposed in LOG4J2-3628 can link to any
issue system, including JIRA. As long as JIRA is accessible and its tickets
become a subject of discussion, we can either keep on using JIRA or simply
move it to GitHub Issues.


On Sat, Nov 5, 2022 at 12:00 AM Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> I’d like to know how we can get GitHub issue links included into the
> release info. Can we continue to use changes.xml?
>
> How are we going to handle issues already in Jira? We currently have 898
> open issues. My guess is we will be lucky to ever get to 10% of them. But
> how do we lock down Jira while being able to work on those issues?
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Nov 4, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >
> > Usage on a phone is certainly a nice advantage for GH. Same with the MFA
> integration, though the ASF is working on integrating MFA with the rest of
> their offered services over time. And it does make it easier for users to
> submit issues now that Jira is restricted.
> >
> > We might want some method for people to submit bug reports who don’t
> want to use GitHub, though that doesn’t need to be too formal (maybe just
> emailing dev@).
> >
> >> On Nov 4, 2022, at 11:55 AM, Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
> >> It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
> >> My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
> >> Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.
> >>
> >> -ck
> >>
> >>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub
> Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We
> don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in
> GitHub.
> >>>
> >>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
> >>>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue
> tracking
> >>>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to
> create
> >>>> a ticket for this and implement it.
> >>>>
> >>>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
> >>>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is
> mentioned
> >>>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
> >>>>
> >>>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever
> necessary.
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
>

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>]

I’d like to know how we can get GitHub issue links included into the release info. Can we continue to use changes.xml? 

How are we going to handle issues already in Jira? We currently have 898 open issues. My guess is we will be lucky to ever get to 10% of them. But how do we lock down Jira while being able to work on those issues?

Ralph

> On Nov 4, 2022, at 10:07 AM, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> 
> Usage on a phone is certainly a nice advantage for GH. Same with the MFA integration, though the ASF is working on integrating MFA with the rest of their offered services over time. And it does make it easier for users to submit issues now that Jira is restricted.
> 
> We might want some method for people to submit bug reports who don’t want to use GitHub, though that doesn’t need to be too formal (maybe just emailing dev@).
> 
>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 11:55 AM, Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net> wrote:
>> 
>> I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
>> It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
>> My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
>> Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.
>> 
>> -ck
>> 
>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in GitHub.
>>> 
>>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
>>>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue tracking
>>>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to create
>>>> a ticket for this and implement it.
>>>> 
>>>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
>>>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is mentioned
>>>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
>>>> 
>>>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever necessary.
>>> 
>> 
> 

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org>]

Usage on a phone is certainly a nice advantage for GH. Same with the MFA integration, though the ASF is working on integrating MFA with the rest of their offered services over time. And it does make it easier for users to submit issues now that Jira is restricted.

We might want some method for people to submit bug reports who don’t want to use GitHub, though that doesn’t need to be too formal (maybe just emailing dev@).

> On Nov 4, 2022, at 11:55 AM, Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net> wrote:
> 
> I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
> It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
> My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
> Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.
> 
> -ck
> 
>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in GitHub.
>> 
>>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
>>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue tracking
>>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to create
>>> a ticket for this and implement it.
>>> 
>>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
>>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is mentioned
>>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
>>> 
>>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever necessary.
>> 
> 

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Carter Kozak <ck...@ckozak.net>]

I’m supportive of using GitHub issues for a few reasons:
It’s more inclusive to our users who can no longer create jira accounts.
My account is more secure, requiring hardware tokens to log in.
Unlike jira, it renders correctly on my phone.

-ck

> On Nov 4, 2022, at 09:43, Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org> wrote:
> 
> I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in GitHub.
> 
>> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
>> 
>> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
>> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue tracking
>> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to create
>> a ticket for this and implement it.
>> 
>> What needs to be done for Log4j?
>> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is mentioned
>> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
>> 
>> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever necessary.
> 

Re: Switch Log4j to GitHub Issues

[Matt Sicker <ma...@musigma.org>]

I’m fairly neutral on the change. At least you can reply to GitHub Issue emails and have them added to the conversation (like with PRs). We don’t really use any fancy Jira features that aren’t also available in GitHub.

> On Nov 4, 2022, at 9:06 AM, Volkan Yazıcı <vo...@yazi.ci> wrote:
> 
> Given the last update from INFRA that new JIRA accounts will only be
> allowed through (PMC?) approval, I propose switching Log4j issue tracking
> to GitHub Issues. Do you have any objections? If not, I volunteer to create
> a ticket for this and implement it.
> 
> What needs to be done for Log4j?
> - Update[1] docs, READMEs, Confluence, POM files, anywhere JIRA is mentioned
> - See if `changes.xml` et al. still functions
> 
> [1] While updating, I will keep a reference to JIRA too, wherever necessary.