On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 5:08 PM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2/15/18 4:56 PM, Christopher wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:55 PM Josh Elser <els...@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.
