Do you have an example of another project using milestones as you're suggesting?
----- Original message ----- From: "Elek, Marton" <e...@apache.org> To: ozone-...@hadoop.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Github issues vs Jira issues Date: Sunday, November 01, 2020 6:30 AM Thanks the questions Arpit and Vivek. I agree with you: the main question is how the existing workflows can be mapped to the features of github issues. We need to collect all the used workflows. I checked the two features which you mentioned: 1. EPIC Epics can be managed in Github with created "projects". For example: https://github.com/elek/hadoop-ozone/projects Seems to be slightly better than Jira: 1. It can show all the existing / in-progress epic as a list 2. It can show a Kanban board for all the epics 3. Issues can be moved automatically based on the status of the PR. 2. FIXED VERSION / CUSTOM FIELDS Yes, custom fields are usually handled by custom labels in Github, which is slightly weaker. However you don't need to create label for the fix versions and both issues and PRs can be assigned to "Milestones" Milestones are something like the versions and provide a progress view out-of the box: https://github.com/elek/hadoop-ozone/milestone/1 Do you have any other features in your mind which should be checked? Thanks, Marton On 10/28/20 5:21 PM, Vivek Ratnavel wrote: > Also, another thing to note would be that Github issues don't support > Epics. > > We will have to create milestones to track big features and their progress > or use a third-party Github action like this - > https://github.com/marketplace/actions/epic-issues-for-github. > > Regards, > Vivek Subramanian > > On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 8:48 AM Arpit Agarwal <aagar...@cloudera.com.invalid> > wrote: > >> Doesn't look like GitHub issues supports custom fields. Does it support >> basics like resolution/fix version? I checked out Druid's GitHub issues, >> everything seems to be tacked on using labels. >> >> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020 at 1:09 AM Elek, Marton <e...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> The new Apache Ozone project requires new git repositories / issue >>> tracker / wiki namespaces. >>> >>> And it seems to be a good opportunity to think about the used issue >>> tracker / issue workflow. >>> >>> >>> I suggest to consider using Github for issue tracking and wiki instead >>> of Jira / Confluence. >>> >>> >>> >>> Advantages: >>> >>> * Better integration between PRs and issues (and between issues and >>> other Github features) >>> >>> * Current workflow would be simplified (doesn't require to create >>> boilerplate Jira issue for each new PR) >>> >>> * Easier for for contributors (doesn't require to create jira user, >>> request to assign permission to be an assignee...) >>> >>> * Easier to follow discussions (I know some issues where half of the >>> discussion was under the PR the other half was under the Jira) >>> >>> * Easier to follow contribution statistics (enough to query github api) >>> >>> >>> >>> Disadvantage: >>> >>> * Finding / reading old issue still require Jira (but we can migrate >>> the open issues if we need them) >>> >>> I don't think it's a big deal as we already have some issues at other >>> places (for example children of HDFS-7240). >>> >>> >>> >>> What are your opinions? >>> >>> >>> Note: There are Apache projects which already uses Github instead of >>> Jira (Superset, Druid and many smaller incubator projects) >>> >>> Marton >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ozone-dev-unsubscr...@hadoop.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: ozone-dev-h...@hadoop.apache.org >>> >>> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ozone.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@ozone.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@ozone.apache.org
