New GitHub Issues Beta • Hacker News Board

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#161

Post by munk-a » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

buro9 wrote: post #61

martinwoodward wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new project experience allows you to track issues that are in different projects, prioritise them alongside each other etc. I work at GitHub where we've been trying this out for a while and it's working pretty well so far for a bunch of the projects I work on when you need that cross-project visibility and co-ordination.

What I need: 1. Issues that can be linked to other issues (regardless of repo), i.e. local issue blocked by remote issue 2. Projects that can contain issues from multiple repos, even a mix of public and private repos Please say this is now possible, otherwise we too are looking at Linear, Jira, etc when we'd like to be looking at Github.

For #1 hasn't this been possible for a long time via including the issue linking text: OrgName/project#12345 in either an issue body or comment text - or else including it in a commit message?

Due to #1 our org created a no-code repository for hosting all of our issues and it's worked out pretty well - PRs reference the ticket using the issue linking text above and it all works pretty seamlessly - the only slight hiccup is that we only write issues in the no-code repository since splitting issues across repo would cause milestoning issues for releases.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#162

Post by munk-a » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:20 PM UTC

dragosmocrii wrote: post #37

telaandrews wrote: post #26

It floors me that they haven't addressed the underlying architecture issues that made Issues unusable: Issues are only for a single repo. Business users don't (and shouldn't) know what repo to add an Issue to. This is why we moved away from Issues and none of these new visualizations make the product usable until they deliver multi-repo issues.

Maybe Github Issues is not supposed to work as a support ticketing system? You are allowed to move issues between repos, so in theory you could create a dummy repo where users can add issues, and then those issues can be moved to their appropriate repo.

I think it's honestly pretty far to do this but never end up moving the issues - we have some repo-of-relevance labels we use to indicate ticket applicability but otherwise our issues just continuously pile up in the same repo.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#163

Post by munk-a » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:22 PM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #129

telaandrews wrote: post #26

It floors me that they haven't addressed the underlying architecture issues that made Issues unusable: Issues are only for a single repo. Business users don't (and shouldn't) know what repo to add an Issue to. This is why we moved away from Issues and none of these new visualizations make the product usable until they deliver multi-repo issues.

GitHub issues should not be used by non-technical contributors though (imo)

Non-technical users are often burdened with the responsibility of project planning and timelining - in this case seeing how many tickets are closed and where your team falls relative to expectation can be invaluable.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#164

Post by rileytg » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:26 PM UTC

anshumankmr wrote: post #124

rileytg wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Jira with 300+ users for both software and non software projects. I don't love it for either but I don't hate it enough to move. Any tool that offered 1:1 feature parity and a full migration, would only need something as simple as slightly cheaper or faster for me to move. IMO the administration is a pain even for simple things. I've also been on Jira for at least 4 years now and the development is just sad...…

I am relatively new to this, completed one year at my job a while back. But I find Jira isn’t that bad. My teams have used Kanban boards to track stuff and I find it quite helpful. Sure, I forget to update my tickets every once in a while but it is a good tool IMO. So can you explain what you meant when you said the new UI isn’t better?

A few years back they started moving to a new UI that is visually a bit better but functionally I find slower to get to what i need. I also find the load times to be extremely frustrating, not sure if that’s related to new UI.

compare this experience to trello or github issues and you’ll see the other end of the spectrum. obviously jira does way more enterprise related features than those two.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#165

Post by HatchedLake721 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:29 PM UTC

greatgib wrote: post #137

Omg, they did a copy of Asana. And not a copy of the good part, but a copy of the useless unergonomic eye candy parts ... And I hate so much Asana... It is so inefficient and frustrating to use. So, please, fire the designer that proposed this change before it can become mainstream. I don't understand the hype about the "board" thing. I guess that people think that they look cool and doing agile by using a board. But…

What view and UI you think would be the most efficient for this?

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#166

Post by quicklime » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:36 PM UTC

> Bored of boards? Switch to tables.

I love this. I don’t know why the “agile board” became a thing. To me it always seemed like a poor way to visualize what is a list of items.

My problem with agile boards is that they place tasks into separate columns to denote the task state, which often cuts off the task description (and can require a lot of horizontal scrolling). It also prevents using columns for other fields like the Assignee (as the table view in the new GitHub Issues does).

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#167

Post by jjcm » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:38 PM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #9

I wonder how tense things are over at Atlassian right now. Jira seems so universally hated that it feels like any competition that ticks a few basic needs could start hurting them.

Ex-Atlassian here. Last day was around a month ago.

Not tense at all. You'd be surprised at how many people actually like Jira, mainly because of how customizable it is. That in my opinion is it's biggest boon and its greatest curse. Every Jira instance is so different it's hard to compare between them. Stock isn't bad at all and works quite well. There are performance issues for sure, but I've yet to see a competitor that has the level of complexity Jira provides do so at a significantly faster speed.

For what it's worth, culture wise Atlassian was great because of how not tense things were. A lot of that is the Australian values in the company. It's very much work-to-live rather than the live-to-work of most Bay Area companies.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#168

Post by djrockstar1 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:41 PM UTC

quicklime wrote: post #166

> Bored of boards? Switch to tables. I love this. I don’t know why the “agile board” became a thing. To me it always seemed like a poor way to visualize what is a list of items. My problem with agile boards is that they place tasks into separate columns to denote the task state, which often cuts off the task description (and can require a lot of horizontal scrolling). It also prevents using columns for other fields l…

Yeah I think the design was made with an analog board in mind, where moving a task is easier than changing its state in place. But for a digital board tables definitely make more sense.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#169

Post by fairpoints777 » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 10:49 PM UTC

Timing in this is perfect for us. Having yet another tool and custom apis or zapiers adds a lot of friction, we were going for I think zenhub but this will suffice

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#170

Post by eyelidlessness » Wed, Jun 23, 2021, 11:48 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #153

eyelidlessness wrote: post #14

> Extend issues with custom fields Further support for my theory that every Trello eventually becomes a Jira.

Die a Trello or live long enough to become a Jira.

It’s funny because I can obviously see the value in the features they’re adding. It’s not ridiculous for people to want more control over task management in GitHub.

The thing that makes me sad about this is how customizable it is. Especially from GitHub, which has a pretty good track record of providing a good UX that mostly works well without such open ended customization. I used to look at GitHub as a great example of providing a good experience because the experience is opinionated.

All things come to an end, but I certainly wasn’t expecting “we have the most basic-but-integrated kanban board you could imagine” -> “we aped all the features of Trello and AirTable without scrutiny” without some intermediate step.