I definitely agree with starting a new [DISCUSS] thread about GitHub Discussions.
Justin On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 11:11 AM Robbie Gemmell <robbie.gemm...@gmail.com> wrote: > We should start a new thread about Discussions so it can be clearly > and specifically discussed..i.e not on this thread or the other > previous thread both originally about Issues. > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 at 16:32, Christopher Shannon > <christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I think overall it would be a positive thing, it gives a place for people > > to ask questions without having to raise a Jira. > > > > I guess the one downside is it would be something else to > monitor...there's > > already Jira, Slack, and the mailing lists. > > > > I think one thing that would be helpful for monitoring is for the > > discussions to be mirrored to email so people can monitor it in one spot, > > and even respond to by email if they want. I assume that the discussions > > can be emailed just like the notifications for PRs so that people don't > > need to check. I'm not sure if it would be better for the discussion > > threads to be mixed in with the existing notifications for PRs or > another > > mailing list. We can always set up filters so sharing the existing > > notification list is probably ok. > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 10:50 AM Justin Bertram <jbert...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Enabling GitHub Discussions is not something we've really discussed > > > thoroughly. I mentioned it in my review only briefly as a "future > > > consideration." I don't think we've got consensus yet. > > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 8:47 AM Christopher Shannon < > > > christopher.l.shan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Is there anything stopping us from enabling Github Discussions for > now? > > > It > > > > seems like we had consensus on that part. > > > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 2:15 PM Matt Pavlovich <mattr...@gmail.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Robbie/JB- > > > > > > > > > > Good calls outs, thanks! I did not mean to skew into contribution > guide > > > > as > > > > > far as I did. I will take a pass at cleaning up. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > > > On Apr 16, 2024, at 11:56 AM, Robbie Gemmell < > > > robbie.gemm...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > The security bits are also detailed in all the repositories > already > > > by > > > > > > default at the org level, e.g > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/?tab=security-ov-file > (or > > > > > > repositories can define their own policy, e.g > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/activemq/?tab=security-ov-file#readme > ). > > > > > > Though we can of course make references to it clearer. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2024 at 17:48, Jean-Baptiste Onofré < > j...@nanthrax.net> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi Matt > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Imho, we are mixing two topics here: > > > > > >> 1. The ticket management system > > > > > >> 2. The contribution guide > > > > > >> > > > > > >> So, let me try to clarify: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [PROPOSAL] > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I'm in favor of GH Issues, but we don't yet have a strong > consensus > > > > > >> about that. I would propose a new thread about that to give a > chance > > > > > >> to anyone to speak, and move to a vote. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [README/CONTRIBUTION GUIDE] > > > > > >> > > > > > >> First, ICLA is not strictly required before committership (the > > > Apache > > > > > >> 2.0 license already covered contributor, it has been discussed > on > > > > > >> LEGAL Jira). > > > > > >> Second, you don't report security issues on a mailing list, you > go > > > to > > > > > >> secur...@apache.org. > > > > > >> Explaining how to report issue, create PR, contribute (e.g. > > > > > >> contribution guide) is fine and welcome. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Regards > > > > > >> JB > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 5:37 PM Matt Pavlovich < > mattr...@gmail.com> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> @dev- > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I appreciate all the good feedback and discussion. A number of > good > > > > > points, suggestions and perspectives. Overall, I see an uptick in > > > > community > > > > > interest in contributing to ActiveMQ and that’s a great thing! I > > > believe > > > > > that modernizing the toolkit, reducing contribution friction and > > > lowering > > > > > load on committers/PMC will help keep the community healthy going > > > forward > > > > > =). > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I've made a pass at summarizing the points and take-aways from > the > > > > > [DISCUSS] thread below. Please reply with suggested > add/edit/removes. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> [Key community Use Cases] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> UC-1. Issue - User opens an Issue and may or may not intend > (or be > > > > > able) to produce a PR to address the report. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> UC-2. PR-onl - User opens a PR without an Issue to address > their > > > > > requested fix. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> UC-3. Security report - User identifies a security issue and > needs > > > to > > > > > report > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> [Proposal] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Action-1. Enable GH issues and flip JIRA to read-only > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Action-2. Update README in repo to be more of a 'how to engage > with > > > > > the community' vs a project overview > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> [Update README document to include] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Update-1. Provide a link for users to create an issue > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Update-2. Provide a link to the mailing list for reporting a > > > security > > > > > issue > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Update-3. Provide a link for users to submit a CLA > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> [Committer/PMC operating] > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Op-A. For use case #2 where user creates a PR without an issue, > > > > before > > > > > approval committer/pmc may instruct contributor to provide signed > CLA > > > and > > > > > open a corresponding issue if the complexity warrants. The PR > comment > > > can > > > > > then be updated with the issue id for reference and linking. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Op-B. Use of GHT Project(s) for planning and tracking Issue & > PR > > > for > > > > > releases. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > > > >>> Matt Pavlovich > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
