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

71–80 of 223 posts

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#71

Post by martinwoodward »

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.

It is indeed now possible. Give it a try and let us know what you think.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#72

Post by whalesalad »

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.

They're doing their best job slowly killing Trello.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#73

Post by alberth »

Question: how does the Table view headings reconcile to the Board view?

On the Table view, there is a heading for: "Prototype", "Beta" and "Launch"

https://github.githubassets.com/images/modules/site/planning...

But when you look at the Board view, I don't see "Prototype", "Beta" or "Launch" denoted anywhere on the card.

https://github.githubassets.com/images/modules/site/planning...

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#74

Post by rileytg »

mbesto wrote: post #53
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 sim…

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... New UI stuff wasn't "better" just different. Pages are still slow if not slower. Reporting is abysmal; we use the API to pull pretty much all data into a database and report from that. The one tool our team's universally loved was canned– a browser extension that allowed you to screenshot and open ticket with things like browser info and URL already in the ticket. We even tried to modify the extension to put metadata from within our application (didn't work and product was sunset anyway).

My outlook is that developers will move towards something like Jetbrain's issue product or maybe even GitHub issues someday. Support teams will move towards a more dedicated support style system like zendesk or a custom solution around twilio. And for non dev projects, I hope better tools come up... Microsoft project seems to still be a leader in my industry, and also seems to be universally hated amongst my teams.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#75

Post by SkyPuncher »

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…

I think too many places try to treat their tickets system as a source of truth, rather than simply a work management system.

* A task with a title that can be understood in context (by the implementer/stakeholder) is sufficient.

* Pointing/effort estimate is even better. Ideally, everything should have points because it helps the team manage workflow and set expectations.

* A description is nice, but often completely unnecessary. In fact, I'd prefer no description to a stale description.

From there, individual teams/developers should choose whatever tools they prefer for actually implementing a feature.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#76

Post by justinjlynn »

denimnerd42 wrote: post #70
justinjlynn wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Long feedback loops and perverse or misaligned incentives == PAIN. Tools like JIRA do absolutely nothing to discourage nonsense like that - and, in fact, provide features designed to support workflows which require them.

Yeah. it never makes sense to make any noise about it either because the people you can reach either don't understand the problem or don't have the power to fix it. It only makes the person making noise look bad.

sigh

Yeah.

The bad news is that I've never heard of a workplace that's managed to change that culture once it's set in. The good news is that there are plenty of places to work which don't have that nonsense - which you can work in, if you can find them; which, to be fair, is pretty difficult. That said, it's worth the effort.

That's one of the questions I ask potential employers - "Say I'd like to make a small change to the workflow, in order to meet an oversight requirement - for example, on a project I'm engineering - how would I go about doing so using your work tracking system? How many people would I need approval from to do so? Let's assume the effect is internal to my project and would require no other team to change how they work. Is that possible?"

The answer usually says a lot more about the prospective employer than any technical questions about their code-bases do - and those are generally easy to suss out with a quick inspection, and SCM log perusal, anyway.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#77

Post by SkyPuncher »

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.

For day-to-day, Jira is completely fine.

I get frustrated with it when I need to dive into basic admin tasks - like spinning up a new project or board. Their admin and setting panels are completely incomprehensible.

Also, Jira doesn't have a story for archiving tickets. Only a straight, permanent, hard delete with no recovery. I got reminded of this the hard way.

-----

We're currently switching to Clubhouse (though a completely unrelated thing was the forcing function). It comes with it's rough edges as well, but it's simple enough we can comprehend it within out headspace.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#78

Post by SkyPuncher »

Groxx wrote: post #30

"it's just a spreadsheet, and [view X] is a filter on that sheet" is a nice mental model. I've had lots of managers organize stuff in google sheets and then copy to [task manager X] simply because it's easier to think about - they'd probably love this. I certainly would, vs Jira's massive "everything is custom UI / a unique concept" mess.

We're constantly amazed at how often we use Trello only for the purpose of drafting and organizing stories before we copy/paste them into Jira.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#79

Post by adt2bt »

Groxx wrote: post #30

"it's just a spreadsheet, and [view X] is a filter on that sheet" is a nice mental model. I've had lots of managers organize stuff in google sheets and then copy to [task manager X] simply because it's easier to think about - they'd probably love this. I certainly would, vs Jira's massive "everything is custom UI / a unique concept" mess.

That, plus keyboard shortcuts for everything means developers will love it as well. This really feels slick.

Re: New GitHub Issues Beta

#80

Post by bob1029 »

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 addressed this by moving to a monorepository for the organization.

Obviously, this doesn't work for everyone, but in my experience it is really amazing when you can pull it off.

Post reply on HN