+1 to maintain both. Why not give contributors a new option with Github Issues? All we need to do is to allow people to create PRs with link to Github Issues, in addition to JIRAs. The only downside I can think of is future release notes will contain mixed items from Github Issues and JIRAs.
On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 7:22 AM Lisa N. Cao <[email protected]> wrote: > > It would make it easier for the community to see the progress of features, > but there is some work involved to maintain both. > > -- > LNC > > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 3:10 PM Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I'm okay with not retiring JIRA, but if we only allow PRs with JIRA >> tickets, we still have the same issue - the new contributors can't work on >> any problems without access to JIRA. >> >> Yes, opening issue tabs will help with community feedback, but I don't >> think we get full benefit from it if we restrict it to be a "discussion >> only" place. The community of spark is not only users, but also occasional >> contributors. >> >> If we worry about the dramatic migration from JIRA, we can open github >> issues, and start building infra around it, while keeping the old system >> working. If we see a trend of committers using github issues more often, >> that's an indicator that people like github integration more than the >> existing JIRA system. >> >> Yes, migrating to github issues means we probably need to throw away a >> bunch of scripts for JIRA, but some of them are not necessary in the first >> place if we use github issues. For example, linking issues to PRs is a >> native supported feature in github. Github supports "squash-only" merge so >> people won't accidentally merge PRs with all the commit history. Github >> also supports "using PR description as commit message". >> >> Even if we do want extra flexibility, github bots have the advantages of >> authentication. For example, if I understand correctly, committers need >> their JIRA token to make the current merge script work - that won't be >> necessary if we use github. Github issues can be closed automatically when >> a linked PR is merged (with close #number) or a github bot can easily do >> that. >> >> Therefore, if we don't want to close JIRA, I'm totally fine with a >> dual-rail system which allows users to submit a PR based on a github issue, >> instead of a JIRA ticket. We can do that gradually and polish up all the >> infra required for github issues. Then we can make a decision whether to >> migrate completely. >> >> Tian Gao >> >> On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 2:47 PM Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> -1 because I don't think we should move from the existing one (ASF JIRA) >>> to a new one (GitHub Issues) completely to meet the suggested ideas. It >>> sounds like a little overkill for the goals. They can be used more >>> harmoniously. >>> >>> Specifically, I want to counter-propose a simpler alternative which is >>> used already in some ASF projects: GitHub Issue Tab can be used as an >>> additional preliminary discussion place (receiving issue reports before >>> creating actual JIRA issues). Since this is open to all GitHub users, it >>> already meets the proposed goals. And, there is no reason to abandon ASF >>> JIRA because only worthy ideas will get JIRA IDs after closing duplicated >>> issues or naive Spark questions from GitHub Issue tabs. >>> >>> We can build a better layered issue reporting system by getting all the >>> benefits of the existing ASF JIRA infra and GitHub Issue Tab instead of >>> wasting lots of the community resources due to the drastic migration (or >>> abandoning the established system, script, practices). >>> >>> > I think we should move from JIRA to github issues for >>> > * more feedback from community >>> > * lower barrier to entry for new contributors >>> > * better integration with the whole github eco-system >>> >>> Dongjoon. >>> >>> >>> On 2026/01/27 14:57:00 Bjørn Jørgensen wrote: >>> > Github use mentioned instead of related to >>> > >>> > Like this >>> > [image: image.png] >>> > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/48961 >>> > >>> > >>> > tir. 27. jan. 2026 kl. 14:58 skrev Nicholas Chammas < >>> > [email protected]>: >>> > >>> > > One thing GitHub Issues doesn’t have a native equivalent to are issue >>> > > links. GitHub will extract mentions of other tickets and highlight >>> them in >>> > > the side bar, but on Jira you can just link a ticket to another one >>> > > directly. >>> > > >>> > > Example: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-28024 >>> > > >>> > > [image: Screenshot 2026-01-27 at 8.55.28 AM.png] >>> > > >>> > > Not saying this is a blocker. Just calling this out so we can try to >>> > > preserve this information after the migration. >>> > > >>> > > Nick >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > On Jan 26, 2026, at 8:00 PM, DB Tsai <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > +1, the bar for using JIRA is too high—contributors need a >>> PMC/committer >>> > > to create an account. Using GitHub issues would make it much easier >>> for >>> > > people to participate. >>> > > DB Tsai | https://www.dbtsai.com/ | PGP 42E5B25A8F7A82C1 >>> > > >>> > > On Jan 26, 2026, at 2:30 PM, Hyukjin Kwon <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > TBH, if we can manage to migrate all related repos in Apache Spark, >>> I feel >>> > > like it might be a great idea. >>> > > lately I started to actively work on Apache Arrow, and realised that >>> they >>> > > also successfully migrate to GitHub Issues from JIRA for all ther >>> repos. >>> > > >>> > > On Tue, 27 Jan 2026 at 05:49, Tian Gao via dev <[email protected] >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Hi all, I'd like to start a discussion on a draft SPIP: >>> > >> >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WMaA49hKyu7gtU189fPq4k8TeI-Q73Q6bqSeWAgR3y8/edit?usp=sharing >>> > >> >>> > >> tl; dr >>> > >> >>> > >> I think we should move from JIRA to github issues for >>> > >> * more feedback from community >>> > >> * lower barrier to entry for new contributors >>> > >> * better integration with the whole github eco-system >>> > >> >>> > >> Many apache projects have moved from JIRA to github issues >>> successfully, >>> > >> including Arrow, Airflow, Beam, Maven, Lucene ... Actually most of >>> apache >>> > >> projects are using github issues now, with a few exceptions >>> including spark. >>> > >> >>> > >> I'd like to hear more about this proposal from the community. >>> > >> >>> > >> Thanks! >>> > >> >>> > >> Tian Gao >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Bjørn Jørgensen >>> > Vestre Aspehaug 4, 6010 Ålesund >>> > Norge >>> > >>> > +47 480 94 297 >>> > >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected] >>> >>>
