Hm, would using GitHub Issues instead of Jira make the trail following easier, harder, or the same?
Gary On Sat, Jun 15, 2024, 2:58 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > If we want to have everything recorded in one place, then we need to put > up some roadblocks to PRs, the Wiki, and Jira like ... what? Have a PR, > wiki, and Jira template/gate that says... you must discuss your > issue/bug/feature first on the mailing list? It does not feel workable. > > I don't think this is about people being dinosaurs, it's just the > technology and processes that are changing. I really like working with > GitHub PRs and GitHub CI builds. I don't want to go back to emails only > just like don't ever want to use an IRC thing. > > Some people don't want to create a GitHub account, so it's Jira and diff > files for them, but that's rare. BUT it gives us a LOT MORE work to > validate a patch compared to GitHub CI where it can use many OSs and Java > version while I'm sleeping :-) > > Gary > > > On Sat, Jun 15, 2024, 2:00 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 15, 2024 at 10:19 AM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > Note that it is 1) awkward to say "Let's stop talking about this PR in >> > this PR" >> >> >> Funny we used to do that all the time in Jira comments. I guess times >> change. FWIW, I think it is a step backward in discussion and ultimately >> code and archive quality. To me it is "awkward" to have to be constantly >> @somebody and not have threads or definitive discussion anywhere. Works >> fine for trivial changes but does not really work for substantive >> discussion of bigger things. So we end up never actually having those >> discussions and there is no reasonably searchable archive of the thought >> process that led to the changes going in. We used to have that and it was >> a useful thing, especially for the more complex components. >> >> Phil >> >> >> >> > and 2) "You need to subscribe to a mailing to continue this >> > chat." It's just hard to find when to ask for a switch. Especially >> > when GH has a nice UI to make comments _about code_. Over at Log4j, we >> > now use GitHub issues instead of Jira, furthering the split... >> > >> > Gary >> > >> > On Sat, Jun 15, 2024 at 12:38 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 10:58 AM Gary D. Gregory <ggreg...@apache.org >> > >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > On 2024/06/12 17:17:24 Phil Steitz wrote: >> > > > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 7:27 AM sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > On Wed, 12 Jun 2024 at 14:45, Gary D. Gregory < >> ggreg...@apache.org >> > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hello All, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Here is the draft of our board report for June I plan on >> > submitting >> > > > in a >> > > > > > day or so, feedback is welcome. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ## Description: >> > > > > > > The mission of Apache Commons is the creation and maintenance >> of >> > Java >> > > > > > focused >> > > > > > > reusable libraries and components >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ## Project Status: >> > > > > > > Current project status: Ongoing with moderate activity. >> > > > > > > Issues for the board: none. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ## Membership Data: >> > > > > > > Apache Commons was founded 2007-06-19 (17 years ago) >> > > > > > > There are currently 149 committers and 44 PMC members in this >> > > > project. >> > > > > > > The Committer-to-PMC ratio is roughly 5:2. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Missing from this paragraph is the fact that Commons has enabled >> > > > > > universal commit. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Community changes, past quarter: >> > > > > > > - Claude Warren was added to the PMC on 2024-03-22 >> > > > > > > - No new committers. Last addition was Claude Warren on >> > 2022-02-01. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > ## Project Activity: >> > > > > > > Many releases of our components: >> > > > > > > CONFIGUATION-2.11.0 was released on 2024-06-10. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Is that a new component? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > NET-3.11.1 was released on 2024-06-10. >> > > > > > > PARENT-71 was released on 2024-06-10. >> > > > > > > JEXL-3.4.0 was released on 2024-06-06. >> > > > > > > NET-3.11.0 was released on 2024-05-31. >> > > > > > > VALIDATOR-1.9.0 was released on 2024-05-28. >> > > > > > > JCS-3.2.1 was released on 2024-05-27. >> > > > > > > DAEMON-1.4.0 was released on 2024-05-24. >> > > > > > > CLI-1.8.0 was released on 2024-05-23. >> > > > > > > COMPRESS-1.26.2 was released on 2024-05-23. >> > > > > > > LOGGING-1.3.2 was released on 2024-05-15. >> > > > > > > PARENT-70 was released on 2024-05-15. >> > > > > > > CSV-1.11.0 was released on 2024-05-02. >> > > > > > > RELEASE-PLUGIN-1.8.2 was released on 2024-04-19. >> > > > > > > CLI-1.7.0 was released on 2024-04-18. >> > > > > > > IMAGING-1.0.0-alpha5 was released on 2024-04-18. >> > > > > > > TEXT-1.12.0 was released on 2024-04-16. >> > > > > > > BUILD-PLUGIN-1.14.0 was released on 2024-04-15. >> > > > > > > IO-2.16.1 was released on 2024-04-08. >> > > > > > > COLLECTIONS-4.5.0-M1 was released on 2024-04-02. >> > > > > > > IMAGING-1.0.0-alpha4 was released on 2024-04-02. >> > > > > > > PARENT-69 was released on 2024-04-01. >> > > > > > > IO-2.16.0 was released on 2024-03-28. >> > > > > > > LOGGING-1.3.1 was released on 2024-03-24. >> > > > > > > PARENT-68 was released on 2024-03-23. >> > > > > > > CONFIGURATION-2.10.1 was released on 2024-03-20. >> > > > > > > CONFIGURATION-2.10.0 was released on 2024-03-13. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > The above list should probably be sorted >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > ## Community Health: >> > > > > > > We welcomed Claude Warren as our latest PMC member. Mailing >> list >> > > > > > activity has >> > > > > > > increased. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Much of the increased mailing list activity is driven by >> dependabot >> > > > > > PRs, many of which are useless, as it does not take Java >> > compatibility >> > > > > > into account. >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 >> > > > > I have had to filter out most of the messages and once I do that, >> > there >> > > > is >> > > > > almost no actual discussion on-list. I am worried that when >> people >> > do >> > > > try >> > > > > to start discussion, the messages are being missed. I personally >> > see the >> > > > > lack of ml discussion as a problem. Lots of code changes are >> > happening >> > > > > with no discussion, other than maybe random nits on PRs ending up >> in >> > > > github >> > > > > threads that don't end up organized that well in list archives. >> This >> > > > > problem is not unique to Commons. >> > > > >> > > > Hi Phil, >> > > > >> > > > We had a discussion a while back about creating a "bot" email list >> but: >> > > > - no one actually proposed anything concrete and did any work >> > > > - we already have bot lists like "commit", "notifications", >> "issues", >> > > > can't we reuse those? >> > > > >> > > >> > > +1 for that. How about moving the dependabot things to >> "notifications"? >> > > What exactly do we use that list for now? I think it is important for >> > > committers to monitor commits but that is not really possible with >> all of >> > > the dependabot spam in there. I personally filter that to /dev/null. >> > > >> > > The problem with github PR comments basically replacing dev@ is a >> bigger >> > > one. It would be helpful if we could figure out a way to pipe (only) >> the >> > > code discussion messages to the dev list, but I think the better >> answer >> > > there would be to establish the discipline that any discussion beyond >> > nits >> > > gets moved to dev@. That may be a dinosaur view, but I think it is >> > worth >> > > considering. I agree with Gilles that fast processing of long-tail >> > > one-shot PRs is useful but misleading when it comes to community >> health. >> > > Steering people to dev@ and actually talking about the code might be >> > > annoying to some in the long tail, but it might net us some new >> > committers, >> > > which IMO is more valuable than a lot of the one shot PRs that we get. >> > > >> > > Phil >> > > >> > > >> > > > - I don't know if GitHub lets us configure target emails for "I >> > created a >> > > > PR" (or someone commented on a PR), vs. other types of messages. >> > > > >> > > > Gary >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Phil >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Most if not all of our increasing contributions are coming in >> > > > > > > through GitHub pull requests. This is working well for us: >> > GitHub PRs >> > > > > > with >> > > > > > > continuous integration builds providing great infrastructure >> and >> > > > > > validation of >> > > > > > > PRs and the existing code base. The flip side is that the >> > increase in >> > > > > > GitHub >> > > > > > > usage is matched by a decrease in Jira usage. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Gary >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > > >> > > > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > >> > >> >
