On 2/15/18 6:18 PM, Christopher wrote:
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.
Glad you like GH issues, but that isn't not what is being discussed
here. The matter at hand is figuring out the logistics of *how* do we
move to a different issue tracker in a manner that doesn't derail the
project management of a fully-distributed team.
I'm worried because I feel like there are valid concerns being brought
up here without acknowledgement of the impact of those who only
participate with Accumulo digitally.
