Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New GitHub Issues Beta

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 223 posts

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#51

Post by denimnerd42 »

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.

first step of any agile transformation is to get yourself neck deep into atlassian products. 2nd step is to setup complex JIRA workflows and reporting and use it to break all agile principles. third step is for your devs to take none of this seriously and put fake data into JIRA which your middle managers never catch onto. then your engineers who actually want to get shit done leave and you're left only with people who put fake shit into JIRA.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#52

Post by telaandrews »

telaandrews wrote: post #44
dragosmocrii wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What if I want to define a new feature that has both backend and frontend tasks, and have separate repos for the FE and BE? Which repo do we create the issue in?

indeed, that's where we ended-up, by using Linear which provides the layer of abstraction. it's just disappointing because it's a long-standing issue, and relatively easy to solve (based on the fact many 3rd parties have).

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#53

Post by mbesto »

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.

> Jira seems so universally hated that it feels like any competition that ticks a few basic needs could start hurting them.

I regularly meet with tech companies in the 2~10 person dev team range and easily 70%+ still use Jira. These co's have the choice of choosing Jira (i.e. it isn't being jammed down on them by a corporate overlord) yet there's still hate? I don't get it.

I'm beginning to think the Jira hate is simply an echo chamber about perceived overhead of project management by IC (mostly engineers), not Jira the actual product. Yes, Jira is complex, but it doesn't have to be. Most dev teams I know just need a tool to organize task intake and allocation. And most smaller ones use Jira because in most cases it'll come batteries included for a dev team.

PS - according to their financials, Atlassian is doing just fine: https://www.cnbc.com/quotes/TEAM?tab=financials

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#54

Post by tyingq »

whatever_dude wrote: post #43
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.

There's already a dozen great competitors for Jira. Jira has a gigantic moat. Too many people - non devs mostly - are invested on it. While this new product is not negligible since it comes from a service people are likely already using, I'm sure Atlassian isn't scared in any special way.

Yes, but the moat has a lot to do with integrated products. This would be a step that way for Github.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#55

Post by justinjlynn »

denimnerd42 wrote: post #51
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.

first step of any agile transformation is to get yourself neck deep into atlassian products. 2nd step is to setup complex JIRA workflows and reporting and use it to break all agile principles. third step is for your devs to take none of this seriously and put fake data into JIRA which your middle managers never catch onto. then your engineers who actually want to get shit done leave and you're left only with people w…

This is so close to reality it really hurts - like a good The Onion article... excellent satire.

Powerful tools are flexible enough to be used correctly by knowledgeable people and help people become knowledgeable. Badly designed tools are tools which don't help people become knowledgeable and don't prevent unknowledgeable people from harming themselves or others using them.

Atlassian tools, like JIRA, are almost always powerful and flexible -- capable of great good in the hands of knowledgeable people. However, they are not well designed tools, and so - the vast majority of JIRA installations and setups are just as broken as the orgs which install them and JIRA offers absolutely zero assistance or resistance to that brokenness.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#56

Post by martinwoodward »

TimWolla wrote: post #5

I'm more interested in GitHub's Issue Forms (as an evolution of Issue Templates): https://twitter.com/frenck/status/1355620350176976901 Does anyone know what the status of these is?

Shipped today. https://github.blog/changelog/2021-06-23-issues-forms-beta-f...

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#57

Post by eisa01 »

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.

We seem to be using Taiga for this reason, but as a non-technical user doing some coding in our repos from time to time, I'd love to use Github. The UX is better, and having everything in one place feels best

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#58

Post by nemothekid »

adrianpike wrote: post #47
telaandrews wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if I want to define a new feature that has both backend and frontend tasks, and have separate repos for the FE and BE? Which repo do we create the issue in?

Neither, you should have a third conceptual tool to encapsulate the overall product, then once you have a feature spec, you cut tickets for the subcomponents. Depending on the API complexity, I personally would either define the spec as a PR to our API doc repo, or define it as part of the backend task.

If I have a third tool, I might as well use that tool for all my issues anyways then? Especially when a tool like Linear can integrate with GH anyways.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#59

Post by tomwas54 »

TimWolla wrote: post #5

I'm more interested in GitHub's Issue Forms (as an evolution of Issue Templates): https://twitter.com/frenck/status/1355620350176976901 Does anyone know what the status of these is?

It's announced here as also being in beta for public repos: https://github.blog/changelog/2021-06-23-issues-forms-beta-f...

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#60

Post by formerly_proven »

foobarbazetc wrote: post #21
bovermyer wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably not that tense. A lot of enterprises with Very Big Licenses are hard-locked into Atlassian products with little to no chance of changing.

The problem is once you connect Jira to Confluence to Team Calendars to Crowd to BitBucket Server you're very deep into the lock-in. Nobody has either the time or the will to switch because, while all the software kind of sucks, it doesn't suck enough to the point where someone is going to stop working on their product and/or service to jettison Atlassian from their org.

I was actually surprised how shallow and poorly functioning the integrations between JIRA / BitBucket / Bamboo and so on are. It all seems very basic compared to the default in OSS. In retrospect it's obvious that all of Atlassians products have been developed by separate teams / bought up and someone spent the bare minimum making each of them talk to each other.
Post reply on HN