I may be given a little too much weight to the history but Jira history also is forensic material while investigating certain features or lack of them. So I would vote for the compromise under the current circumstance.
for 3, +1. On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:11 PM, Atri Sharma <[email protected]> wrote: > For 2, +1 > On 10 Sep 2015 11:32, "Chris Nauroth" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hello Apex devs, > > > > I'd like to share some new information about the ASF JIRA migration, > > tracked in issue INFRA-10145. > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-10145 > > > > First, I'd like to take this opportunity to make sure the whole Apex > > community knows that there are multiple means of contacting the Apache > > infrastructure engineers. This is documented here. > > > > http://www.apache.org/dev/infra-contact > > > > My experience has always been that the infrastructure team is responsive, > > helpful and friendly. Please feel free to contact them if necessary. I > > typically start by filing an INFRA issue in JIRA, and then follow up in > > the HipChat channel if there is no response in JIRA after a few days. > > > > I checked in at the HipChat channel today about our JIRA migration > status. > > Gavin, who is handling INFRA-10145 for us, was not available, but the > > other infrastructure engineers pointed out a few challenges. The version > > of JIRA in use hosted at Atlassian is different from the version > currently > > running in Apache. In order to do an import, the versions must match > > exactly, so our import actually would trigger an upgrade of ASF JIRA. > > This would require planned downtime with at least 72 hours notice. After > > that, there would be some challenges with making sure imported data > aligns > > with best practices used in ASF JIRA, such as using roles instead of > > groups. Considering all of this, the infrastructure team's experience is > > that imports take a long time, even in the best case. > > > > The infrastructure team and I discussed a few options for moving ahead. > > > > 1. Do not migrate to ASF JIRA. The infrastructure team noted that there > > is nothing in the incubation process that mandates moving off of your > > Atlassian hosted instance. I had not been aware of this. > > > > 2. Move to ASF JIRA, but skip the import, and start with a clean slate. > > > > 3. Move to ASF JIRA now, but allow the import activity to continue in the > > background. Once we start using ASF JIRA though, imported issues would > > not be able to land in the same project key. They'd likely have to > remain > > under the old project keys used at the Atlassian instance. > > > > 4. Keep waiting for the migration with the understanding that it will > take > > time to complete. > > > > I'd like to gauge the Apex community's opinion on how to proceed. My own > > opinion is that it would be beneficial to move to ASF JIRA, so I'd prefer > > to rule out option 1. One of the benefits of Apex is its integration > with > > numerous other Apache projects, and it can be useful to share the same > > JIRA instance with those other projects. For example, if you trace the > > root cause of an Apex issue into HDFS, and you want to contact an HDFS > > engineer, you can ask me for feedback by entering @cnauroth on a comment. > > If you remain in the Atlassian instance, it's not guaranteed that > > contributors on other Apache projects will have an account there. If the > > issue is confirmed as an HDFS bug, you can then link your Apex issue to > > the corresponding HDFS issue for easy navigation. I don't believe this > > would work as cleanly in the Atlassian instance. > > > > My preference is option 2 for simplicity. However, this has the side > > effect of discarding past history. Does the Apex community consider the > > past history to be important? Is it important enough to preserve the > past > > history that you're willing to wait longer for a migration? > > > > Please let me know your thoughts. > > > > --Chris Nauroth > > > > >
