On 9/2/20 7:55 AM, Christian Boltz wrote:
Hello,
Am Montag, 31. August 2020, 13:14:04 CEST schrieb Simon Lees:
On 8/18/20 6:19 AM, Christian Boltz wrote:
Am Montag, 10. August 2020, 12:22:50 CEST schrieb Lubos Kocman:
[Community access to Jira]
We'll initially have rather a smaller pool of users (initially 10) and will grow it over time based on the popularity. Just FYI: The standard size of the pool for partners is 2, so openSUSE is being taken seriously as a partner here.
Let me play devil's advocate, and also warn you that the following paragraph might contain traces of sarcasm ;-)
Let me maybe play devil's advocate back.
That's fine, I already wondered if/why nobody dares to answer ;-)
I was off sick :-)
In the good [1] old times ;-) of FATE (aka features.o.o), _everybody_ was able to submit a feature request and to see feature requests by community members. And now you are telling us that we should be thankful that 10 selected people will get access, and maybe that number will increase? Of course, 10 is better than nobody, but IMHO the perfect number of people allowed to access Jira would be ∞ ;-)
I think the problem here was more while everyone could create a feature request, no one was reading them let alone thinking about implementing them,
I know this was a problem, but - playing devil's advocate again - why should this be different/better just because we switch to another tool?
Its less about switching to another tool and more about the fact that SUSE is committing resource to do this job now (they weren't doing so in the openSUSE instance of open fate).
And I still think only allowing 10 community members to access Jira would be a serious problem.
Agreed. I believe 10 people is an "Initial pilot program" and it will open up further in the future.
atleast now they are going into a tool where someone will probably look at them, let the maintainer know about them and maybe provide some feedback.
I guess that still needs someone who assigns the request to the maintainer, so where's the difference to FATE/openFATE?
Yep as I said above SUSE has committed to dedicating resource to do this in the same way as they do for there partners, the difference is SUSE no longer uses FATE to do this so using fate would create 2 different processes rather then one.
Allowing everybody to access JIRA could have benefits for both SUSE and the community. For example, with more people having access, maybe someone would accidently stumble over a feature request, and help to implement it? Or someone comes up with an idea for _the_ feature that would generate lots of money for SUSE, but doesn't want to do the paperwork to get access to JIRA?
It would have benefits, but I'm not sure they outweigh the excessive costs that would be required to purchase a license that would allow every member of the community simultaneous access.
I guess when the product management team were considering the tool they wanted to use they didn't consider needing that number of licenses and considered a bunch of features jira provides over the competition as really important.
I can't imagine (well, at least I hope) that the product management team didn't have openSUSE in mind when choosing Jira over $alternatives.
But if the costs are the only problem you see - AFAIK Atlassian also provides a community license [1]. I don't know the exact conditions and requirements, but in general, we could ask for a community license for openSUSE, which should help to solve the costs argument.
And even if openSUSE doesn't qualify for a community license for whatever strange reason, I still think that giving access to all communiy members would be worth the price.
We don't qualify this discussion was already had. Part of the reason is openSUSE doesn't have an independent legal structure, another part I think was we are too tightly tied to SUSE there may have been other reasons. I only heard these third hand but my impression was that because we don't have a foundation its easy for them to say no, but even if we did have a foundation they'd probably find other ways to say no.
[ Personally I wonder why we (both SUSE and openSUSE) need a separate tool for tracking feature requests at all. I'd simply do everything in bugzilla, maybe with a separate "feature requests" product. And yes, I'm aware that bugzilla doesn't let managers do their paperwork (or "workflow") games they like so much in FATE and now Jira and ECO ;-) ]
Beyond that our current bugzilla doesn't have fine grain enough access control on issues among other things, I also believe due to time constraints developing something internally was out of the question and I believe they equally wanted a system they didn't have to host and maintain in house.
I also have a question: which feature requests will the selected openSUSE contributors be able to see? Those reported by other openSUSE contributors (would be similar to FATE/features.o.o), or also feature requests reported by other partners? (You can probably guess my prefered answer, but I also understand that other partners might want to have their requests kept private.) My guess is GDPR will mean that only the later, and its reasonable to expect that some others are under NDA so certainly not all.
Please don't abuse GDPR as an argument ;-) GDPR always has the option of permitting something, so if some partners are willing to make their requests public, GDPR won't stop them.
Yep but that requires support in the tooling to ask this option :-) Cheers -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B