Sounds easier to follow and avoids navigating all the time between JIRA and Github -- Jean-Louis Monteiro http://twitter.com/jlouismonteiro http://www.tomitribe.com
On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 8:53 AM Francois Papon <francois.pa...@openobject.fr> wrote: > +1 > > We did that move on Shiro and it's easier because we don't need to > manage user access. > > Same for Jenkins but I don't know if there is a limit about the runners > execution on github (api). > > regards, > > On 13/10/2023 18:04, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > Even if we are pretty busy and focused on ActiveMQ 6.0.0 release > > preparation (as said in another email, I should be able to submit the > > release to vote next week), I think we can anticipate a little the > > future of ActiveMQ. > > ActiveMQ 6.0.0 is a major milestone for the project, heading to a more > > modern approach (I started a PoC to remove Spring dep and using SPI > > like approach at broker side, I will keep you posted about that) for > > the codebase, website, and our developer experience. > > > > I would like to discuss: > > 1. Moving from Apache Jenkins to GitHub Actions, using multiple > > workflows, more decoupled, with potentially more "executors" to build > > and leveraging GitHub Actions "modules". > > 2. Moving from Apache Jira to GitHub Issues. Several Apache projects > > already use GitHub Issues. At OPS4J we also migrated from Jira to GH > > Issues. We were able to import everything from Jira without losing > > data. I think it would also be a good opportunity to do some cleanup, > > maybe starting with only tickets for 6.x. > > > > Thoughts ? > > > > Regards > > JB >
