I went ahead and imported the rest of the issues from cwiki and setup assignee = shephard, reviewers == contributors.
Epic in JIRA <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15536> Query in JIRA of the tickets created: https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%3D%20CASSANDRA%20and%20%22Epic%20Link%22%20%3D%20CASSANDRA-15536 Note: this'll bloat our #'s next week on status update, but that's probably for the best as this was "invisible scope" of a sort. Are there any proponents of the cwiki approach or is there any feedback / thoughts on the JIRA approach? Thanks. ~Josh On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 3:39 PM Joshua McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > From the people that have modified this page in the past, what are your > thoughts? Good for me to pull the rest into JIRA and we redirect from the > wiki? > +joey lynch > +scott andreas > +sumanth pasupuleti > +marcus eriksson > +romain hardouin > > > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:57 AM Joshua McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> what we really need is >>> some dedicated PM time going forward. Is that something you think you can >>> help resource from your side? >> >> Not a ton, but I think enough yes. >> >> (Also, thanks for all the efforts exploring this either way!!) >> >> Happy to help. >> >> On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 2:46 PM Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> > <snip> >>> > My .02: I think it'd improve our ability to collaborate and lower >>> friction >>> > to testing if we could do so on JIRA instead of the cwiki. *I suspect >>> *the >>> > edit access restrictions there plus general UX friction (difficult to >>> have >>> > collab discussion, comment chains, links to things, etc) make the >>> confluent >>> > wiki a worse tool for this job than JIRA. Plus if we do it in JIRA we >>> can >>> > track the outstanding scope in the single board and it's far easier to >>> > visualize everything in one place so we can all know where attention >>> and >>> > resources need to be directed to best move the needle on things. >>> > >>> > But that's just my opinion. What does everyone else think? Like the >>> JIRA >>> > route? Hate it? No opinion? >>> > >>> > If we do decide we want to go the epic / JIRA route, I'd be happy to >>> > migrate the rest of the information in there for things that haven't >>> been >>> > completed yet on the wiki (ticket creation, assignee/reviewer chains, >>> links >>> > to epic). >>> > >>> > So what does everyone think? >>> > >>> >>> I think this is a good idea. Having the resources available to keep the >>> various bits twiddled correctly on existing and new issues has always >>> been >>> the hard part for us. So regardless of the path, what we really need is >>> some dedicated PM time going forward. Is that something you think you can >>> help resource from your side? >>> >>> (Also, thanks for all the efforts exploring this either way!!) >>> >>
