Then I think we should use a PR reference instead of a simple link. Do you see a problem I did not expect?
I'm fine with that. I have to think about the testing because I cannot use the original Jira project because a test run would trigger new events in the original PR. This would be a waste.
Should we need to map a priority from JIRA to GitHub issues - it can be useful information.
Label mapping for priorities is done. Please review the result [1]
issues migration is like ARCHETYPE but past milestones have not been imported: https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-mclean/milestones is it intentional?No, I think my migration config is wrong. I will check it.
It is fixed. See also result [1] - Sandra[1] https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-mclean/issues
Am 13.01.25 um 07:42 schrieb Hervé Boutemy:
Le dimanche 12 janvier 2025, 09:50:28 CET Sandra Parsick a écrit :It appears that link to an external sources have a separate datatype. Therefore, the migration tool ignores it. I will fix it (see issue [1]).I solved this issue. I added a new text in the body. Please check it if it is good enough. [1]great, this new text is perfect to get a link from migrated GHI to the PR without going to Jira as intermediate (to anticipate a future where the Jira server would be taken down)It is possible to add a PR reference to the GitHub issue, but this triggers an event on the original PR. I'm not sure if this behavior is wanted.we need to refine benefits and drawbacks, to decide what we do: from what I see, doing a PR reference from migrated GHI to the PR won't change navigation from GHI to PR But it will add a navigation back from the PR to the migrated GHI = something that is currently missing Such back links are normal, and are added whenever someone manually add a link to a PR: the fact that in the current case, it would be automatic, does not change anything. And such back links will happen at migration time only Then I think we should use a PR reference instead of a simple link. Do you see a problem I did not expect? Regards, Hervé[1] https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-archetype/issu es/329Am 11.01.25 um 15:12 schrieb Matthias Bünger:I think having the possibility to give issues / PR a priority ist very useful in a environment like Maven - but should only be doable by maintainers (as all labels, except the auto labels when using the issue template). Btw labels: I like it very much, that the label for newcomers is called "good first issue" and not "up for grabs" (which quite a lot projects use, but which has a total different meaning). Am 11.01.2025 um 12:50 schrieb Slawomir Jaranowski:Should we need to map a priority from JIRA to GitHub issues - it can be useful information. If so, we can add labels like - https://maven.apache.org/developers/conventions/github.html#Priority On Fri, 10 Jan 2025 at 21:51, Hervé Boutemy <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote:Le mercredi 8 janvier 2025, 18:50:59 CET Sandra Parsick a écrit :- ARCHETYPE Migration result: https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-archetype Used migration config: https://github.com/support-and-care/jira-to-gh-issues/blob/master/ src/main/j ava/io/pivotal/migration/MArchetpeMigrationConfig.javawow, I'm impressed: issues, past closed and still open: https://github.com/support-and- care/mvn-issues-migration-test-archetype/issues?q=is%3Aissue+ past milestones: https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues- migration-test-archetype/milestones?state=closed the only missing aspect I found is when a Jira issue links to a PR, like for example https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARCHETYPE-690 the issue in GH does not display it: https://github.com/support-and- care/mvn-issues-migration-test-archetype/issues/647 with that as a reference, I'm much more confident, once this PR link is solved- MCLEAN Migration result: https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-mclean Used migration config: https://github.com/support-and-care/jira-to-gh-issues/blob/master/ src/main/j ava/io/pivotal/migration/MCleanMigrationConfig.javaissues migration is like ARCHETYPE but past milestones have not been imported: https://github.com/ support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-mclean/milestones is it intentional?- MJLINK Migration result: https://github.com/support-and-care/mvn-issues-migration-test-mjlink Used migration config: https://github.com/support-and-care/jira-to-gh-issues/blob/master/ src/main/j ava/io/pivotal/migration/MJLinkMigrationConfig.javasame result as MCLEAN to me, if we fix missing PR links, and import milestones in MCLEAN and MJLINK like it has been done for ARCHETYPE, we can envision wide migration after some time to stress test and learn doing releases for tracking progress, if we can, it would be nice to track in Wiki https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/ JIRA+to+GitHub+Issues+switching I'll add columns for tracking data migration, and lines for the few tests And if we could migrate issues for MPOM and MASFRES, it would be nice Regards, Hervé --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
