accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Drob <md...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Switch to GitHub issues after trial
Date Fri, 16 Feb 2018 15:47:33 GMT
Thanks Mike, those are great answers! They don't even have to be the final
answers, but I'm really happy to see that the migration path has been
thought about.

I disagree with you about the criticality of security issues and how we
handle them, but we can run a "fire drill" during the trial to fully
develop the process.

If you're volunteering to write a migration script using rest APIs (or
perhaps one already exists) then that addresses the last of my concerns to
starting a trial.
Obviously I'd consider completion and testing of the script a requirement
to completing the switch, but that's still a ways off.

Consider me officially onboard with running a trial.

Mike

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 9:27 AM, Mike Walch <mwalch@apache.org> wrote:

> I am going to try to answer your questions. Keep in mind that my answers
> are how
> I would handle the transition. The point of the trial is to iterate and
> find the best
> solution for everyone.
>
>
> > Some of the concerns brought up would be answerable with a trial. How do
> we
> > do a release? What does aggregating issues fixed in a particular version
> > look like?
> >
>
> You can tag GH issues with a version but I think it's best to just go
> through commit history
> to compile the release notes. This should already be done as there is no
> guarantee
> even with Jira that all issues were labeled correctly. If you are using
> GitHub issues, all issue
> numbers in commits link back to the issue or pull request which we don't
> have with Jira right
> now.
>
>
> > A trial would also answer how we handle security issues - JIRA can make
> > certain issues only visible to PMC. Is there a GH issues equivalent?
> >
>
> I don't think there is GH issues equivalent but I don't think this is a
> critical feature.
> The PMC has record on the private email list of any security issues. If
> it's a true security
> issue, shouldn't it be fixed immediately anyways?
>
> Some issues are not answerable with a trial, however. What happens to our
> > old issues? Do we close them as Won't Fix? Do we migrate them? Do we lock
> > JIRA and leave the archives up as a historical reference? If there is
> some
> > aspect of a trial that would answer this, then I'm all ears.
> >
>
> As for the migration, both GitHub & Jira have REST APIs. I could create a
> script that
> reads all open Jira issues and creates a corresponding GitHub issue. Each
> issue
> on GitHub could link back the old Jira issues and vice versa.  It wouldn't
> be a perfect
> transition as I am sure not all fields will be moved over but we could at
> least get title,
> descriptions, reporter, and affected versions moved. If there is a link
> back to the original
> Jira issue, you could always go back to view original issue. This migration
> could be
> tested on a fork before being done on the main repo.  After the migration
> is done,
> I would lock Jira but leave it up for historical purposes.
>
>
> > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:26 PM, Mike Walch <mwalch@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I want step back a little. I don't view this as just changing our issue
> > > tracker. I want to move to GitHub issues as I see a lot of benefit in
> > using
> > > one tool to manage issues, view/browse code, and review pull requests.
> > One
> > > tool makes contributing to open source so much easier.  I think it will
> > > become the norm over time. This doesn't mean projects need to be locked
> > > into GitHub. Gitlab provides the same thing. I understand there are
> > > switching costs so I am on board with a trial. However, I think the
> > > benefits are worth the switch. You can fight this trend but I think
> it's
> > > like fighting the move from Subversion to Git.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 7:04 PM, Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 2/15/18 6:18 PM, Christopher wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:08 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2/15/18 4:56 PM, Christopher wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:55 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 2/15/18 4:17 PM, Mike Drob wrote:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> What do we do if the trial is wildly successful? Is
there a
> > > migration
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> plan
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> for our currently open issues? We have almost
1000 of them.
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>>> As Keith said in the other thread, we don't
need to have all
> the
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> answers up
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> front.
> > > >>>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>> You're right, we don't need to have all of the
answers up
> front.
> > > >>>>>> This is one that I'd like to have some thought put
into though.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> There's lots of things that are fine to handle as
we approach
> it,
> > > but
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> this
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>> one seems like it will lead to us having split issue
trackers
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> for_years_
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> down the road.
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>> This is a good point I hadn't yet considered.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> There's not only the migration question that eventually
needs to
> be
> > > >>>>> answered, but an immediate question of how will we determine
when
> > we
> > > >>>>> can
> > > >>>>> release a version of Accumulo? Are there conventions/features
on
> > the
> > > GH
> > > >>>>> issues side that will provide some logical analog to the
> fixVersion
> > > of
> > > >>>>> JIRA?
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>> These are all great questions... that could be answered with
a
> > > trial...
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>> Shall I assume then that you are volunteering to handle all issue
> > > >>> management across the disparate systems for all releases?
> > > >>>
> > > >>> A trial is a good idea to determine _if we like the system_ and
> want
> > to
> > > >>> migrate to it. It's not a substitute for determining if the system
> is
> > > >>> _viable_.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >> I'm of a different opinion: I already know I like GitHub issues and
> > want
> > > >> to
> > > >> migrate to it. What I don't know is if it is viable for Accumulo's
> > > needs.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Glad you like GH issues, but that isn't not what is being discussed
> > here.
> > > > The matter at hand is figuring out the logistics of *how* do we move
> > to a
> > > > different issue tracker in a manner that doesn't derail the project
> > > > management of a fully-distributed team.
> > > >
> > > > I'm worried because I feel like there are valid concerns being
> brought
> > up
> > > > here without acknowledgement of the impact of those who only
> > participate
> > > > with Accumulo digitally.
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message