Hi Anthony! Sorry for the late reply but I was doing some research. The issues and wiki section as of now has been used by few engineers only and Confluent has not yet entered any issues as they are still reviewing the project. I went ahead and looked into all projects in the Apache domain using issues and the extra features they enable. *JIRA vs Issues:*
- There are a sizable number of Apache projects who are using GitHub issues - One clear advantage is the automatic linking of PRs and Issues. Issues can be closed automatically once the PR is merged. - It can also enable a feature to delete the feature branch automatically once the PRs is merged (we have lot unused feature/GEODE-xxxx branches in origin which were not deleted after merging PRs) - It enables us to use Github Project management(Github version of PivotalTracker) which is integrated with Github issues and PRs and all the movement from "To-do", "In-progress", "resolved" and "closed" are automated depending on if a PR is opened, requires reviews, reviewed and merged state. *Github Wiki vs Confluence Wiki:* - As you have mentioned that visibility is more important, we can follow other open-source products like Greenplum, Hystrix and we can use the wiki page to explain stuff like how to contribute, basic architecture, internal knowledge, i.e information that is needed to contribute to Geode. - A signification advantage is the colocation of code and wiki. Any developer can find Geode GitHub repo and that person now has all the tools needed to start contributing. A few examples of well-written wikis on GitHub: - https://github.com/d3/d3/wiki - https://github.com/Netflix/Hystrix/wiki - https://github.com/apache/helix/wiki ASF: word on the street is that it was mentioned in ApacheCon, that they support the use of Github wiki and issues in ASF projects, and this can also be seen in multiple INFRA tickets mentioning enabling wiki. I am also looking into ZenHub to improve our workflow. ZenHub is a very robust project management tools used by Apache Contributors and corporations like VMware. Regards Nabarun Nag On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 2:40 PM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Having used pretty every style of wiki, I care less about the wiki tech > and more about making the content easily accessible and discoverable for > our users and contributors. Our current wiki has a lot of useful > information. I’d like to understand how we want to use repo-specific > wiki’s to augment or replace our current project wiki (or neither)\ before > taking any decisions. > > Anthony > > > > On Apr 23, 2020, at 12:54 PM, Blake Bender <bben...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > GitHub Wiki supports Markdown, our current one does not. This means > GitHub > > wins by default in my book. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Blake > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 23, 2020 at 8:50 AM Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > >> Naba, do you have any updates to share? I’m curious if you have found > >> this useful compared to JIRA. > >> > >> Also, I noticed that geode-kafka-connector also has a GitHub wiki. How > >> does that compare with centralizing our information in the ASF > confluence > >> wiki? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Anthony > >> > >> > >>> On Mar 21, 2020, at 5:16 PM, Nabarun Nag <n...@apache.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hello team, > >>> > >>> We are planning to experiment with using Github issues and wiki for the > >>> Apache project *Geode-Kafka-Connector. *(not Apache Geode project). > >> Please > >>> do give your vote on this as we need to send the vote link to infra to > >>> activate it. > >>> > >>> *Why are we doing this ? / Advantages* : > >>> 1. *Unified location* to have documentation, code and issue tracking. > >>> 2. Leverage Github tools like Github pages to create websites hosting > >>> information about the project. > >>> 3. No separate JIRA accounts or permission required to create issues. > >>> 4. This will have *no impact on the broader Geode community* as right > now > >>> only 3-4 developers involved in this project. > >>> 5. *This is an experiment.* If things do not work out we can always > >> revert > >>> back to the traditional way of having separate JIRA, documentation, > >>> websites etc. > >>> > >>> *Precedence*: > >>> 1. Kubernetes uses the github issues > >>> 2. RabbitMQ uses github issues. > >>> > >>> > >>> *NOTE: *- Please be cordial and do not use any condescending language > and > >>> absolutely no bullying. > >>> - Please treat this email as a professional business email and maintain > >>> email etiquette while replying. > >>> > >>> Regards > >>> Nabarun > >> > >> > >
