Apache Spark is already using Github heavily to accept code changes, so 1, 2, and 3 do not seem to be an issue to me. AI spam can already happen with PRs (writing code is cheap today with LLM) and opening Github Issues won't make a big difference.
> 4. Degraded Traceability. This makes sense. Until we find a better solution with a smooth migration plan, I think we should still open JIRA tickets for code changes that worth to trace. For now we only allow minor changes to omit JIRA, maybe we should extend it, like only create JIRA tickets for changes that worth to be mentioned in the release notes. We can follow the common practice from other Apache projects. On Mon, Feb 2, 2026 at 9:33 PM Nicholas Chammas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Feb 2, 2026, at 2:02 AM, Dongjoon Hyun <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Adopting GitHub Issues imposes a new burden. Committers and PMC members > will face increased overhead in moderating AI spam. Unlike the current ASF > JIRA system, which now requires PMC approval for account creation (a > human-in-the-loop defense), GitHub accounts are easier to create and abuse. > Banning GitHub accounts is a tedious and unpleasant task for maintainers. > > Banning accounts should not be that tedious. It’s just a couple of clicks, > no? > > And accounts that are creating AI slop are likely doing it on other > projects, meaning that GitHub will already be getting signals about an > account’s quality before any Spark admin takes action. Severe offenders are > likely to be banned globally by GitHub. > > Being on GitHub also means that we will have access to more tools that are > integrated with the GitHub ecosystem to help manage problems like these, > should we need them. > > > 3. Accessibility and Vendor Lock-in. > > > > We should not assume all users want or have GitHub accounts. Issue > reporting is distinct from code contribution. The current ecosystem allows > anyone with an email to participate via ASF infrastructure. Mandating > GitHub Issues forces users onto a third-party commercial platform, > effectively raising the barrier to entry for bug reporting. > > This argument doesn’t make sense to me. Earlier you were warning that > lowering the barrier to entry will lead to more moderation overhead, but > here you are arguing the opposite, that GitHub raises the barrier to entry. > > GitHub is so widely used in our industry that it’s reasonable to assume > that it offers the lowest barrier to entry of any code collaboration > platform. Reporting issues is a basic part of that. > > I think it would be difficult to find anyone, especially a new > contributor, who feels that ASF Jira is more accessible than GitHub. > > Nick > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe e-mail: [email protected] > >
