I managed to look at both, but there was a lot of back-and-forth between GitHub and Jira along the lines of "Is there a PR for this already?"
Sent from [Proton Mail](https://proton.me/mail/home) for Android. -------- Original Message -------- On Wednesday, 05/20/26 at 15:36 Antonio Blanco <[email protected]> wrote: > I recently went through the exercise of contributing my first PR to spark. > > While I think that the JIRA definitely contains a rich history and project > context, I will add that the workflow was a bit novel compared to the > classical “open an Issue and discuss” contribution workflow. > > I do think there may be some risk of bifurcation of project history from one > platform to another, but I would also add that it would lower the barrier of > entry for first time contributors. > > —Antonio > > Sent from my iPhone. > >> On May 20, 2026, at 2:43 PM, Tian Gao via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Hi, >> >> From our discussion 3 months ago >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/kv11qlr8j05cwqjoyddybclwcn0nv2n7 , we've >> decided to open github issues as an experimental option and evaluate the >> results after 3 months. Now it's time! >> >> In the last 3 months, we opened github issues solely for bug reports and >> improvement requests. We got 63 issues in total. Most of them are valid, we >> probably had 1 or 2 spams. Even without any template (it was never merged), >> almost every issue was created with a detailed description. Very few issues >> came from committers. >> >> I (Claude Code) did a quick search in JIRA. In the same time frame, I asked >> it to list JIRA tickets that: >> 1. is either bug or improvement >> 2. has a description longer than 50 words >> 3. assignee is not reporter >> 4. either there is no linked PR, or the first PR was created more than 12 >> hours after the ticket was created >> >> This filter attempts to exclude "community reports", ruling out JIRA tickets >> created just for submitting a PR. >> >> The number is approximately 47. I think it's safe to say that we received at >> least the same amount of feedback from the community on GitHub as on JIRA. >> Another interesting number is 1394 - that's the number of JIRA tickets >> created during this timeframe. What it represents is probably beyond this >> thread's discussion, but that's an interesting diff. >> >> Now back to our next step. According to my proposal, we had to choose from >> one of the following options: >> >> 1. Explicitly declaring that we need more time for this experiment. 3 or 6 >> extra months. >> 2. Close the github issues because the maintenance effort is larger than the >> benefit. >> 3. Decide that using github issues as discussion only is the best way for >> spark and keep doing it. >> 4. Support github issues as an equivalent to JIRA tickets so PRs can link to >> them too. >> 5. Fully migrate from JIRA to github issues. >> >> Personally I think github issues have proven useful, but different opinions >> are definitely appreciated. There's almost no maintenance cost for github >> issues so I don't think we need to choose 2. I'd love to hear from the >> community about their preferred option. To make it more objective, I won't >> choose one here. >> >> Tian
