IMHO I think that it makes total sense to have all in the same platform, for the reasons already mentioned.
Question: does it make sense to enable github discussions for questions? On Sat, Oct 22, 2022, 09:55 Andy Grove <andygrov...@gmail.com> wrote: > I believe that using GitHub issues has reduced overhead for us in the Rust > projects and lowered the barrier for new contributors. As shown in the blog > post for the latest DataFusion release alone [1], there were 62 > contributors and 31 of them contributed a single PR, so I think that > demonstrates that there is a low barrier to contributing. > > I recommend having good GitHub PR templates that encourage people to file > issues for any non-trivial changes. We generate our change logs from GitHub > issues and PRs and that has been working well. It just seems easier overall > to manage issues and PRs in the same platform and leverage GitHub's > functionality for linking them and auto-closing issues when PRs are merged, > using the same labeling system between issues and PRs, being able to ping > people with one username instead of remembering their Jira and GitHub > usernames, and so on. > > I could not imagine having to go back to the Jira approach personally but I > understand that others may not share that view. > > Andy. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow-site/pull/254 > > On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 7:36 AM Neal Richardson < > neal.p.richard...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > ASF Infra has announced [1] that, due to spam account creation, it will > no > > longer be possible for people to sign themselves up for a Jira account to > > report issues as of November 6. Instead, the PMC will have to request the > > creation of Jira accounts. > > > > Their email says: > > > > > Infra knows this process change places an increasing burden on PMC > > members > > > for managing contributors, and makes it harder for people to contribute > > bug reports. > > > We suggest projects consider using GitHub Issues for customer-facing > > questions/bug > > > reports/etc., while maintaining development issues on Jira. > > > > but I think that having a two-tiered system for issue tracking presents > > some notable downsides for us, including: > > > > * Increased barriers to entry for new contributors and a sense of > > inequality between "us" and "them". There's already too much friction > IMO, > > and this pushes that up significantly. > > * Maintenance burden of triaging and synchronizing issues across trackers > > sounds like a lot for us to take on. I'd prefer the active maintainers on > > the project spend their time shipping useful, reliable software, not > doing > > bookkeeping. > > > > So as much as I genuinely *hate* bringing this topic up, I wanted to see > > what folks think about moving our issue tracking fully to GitHub Issues. > I > > know this has been discussed before and shot down, but the circumstances > > are different now so I think it merits revisiting. It would also be great > > to hear from the Rust folks how their experience has been using GitHub > > Issues on arrow-rs and datafusion. > > > > Neal > > > > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/jx9d7sp690ro660pjpttwtg209w3m39w > (not > > sure if everyone has access to the annou...@infra.apache.org list) > > >
