Thanks nabog! We actually didn't realize GitHub had inline images in issues or binary releases, which was one of our sticking points. This inspired me to go back and research other "sticking points" (e.g. download counts on releases - GitHub exposes an API, other attachments - we can use gists) that might be out of date.
So it looks like we have suitable replacements for everything we have in Codeplex, and all that remains is to actually do the work to migrate everything over (porting issues, changing the documentation format/process to be compatible with GitHub, changing our internal rolling build process, etc.)
For reviews, we might be able to plug into the VS extension gallery. I agree they're not a huge deal, but nice to have. We mainly use them for:
So it looks like we have suitable replacements for everything we have in Codeplex, and all that remains is to actually do the work to migrate everything over (porting issues, changing the documentation format/process to be compatible with GitHub, changing our internal rolling build process, etc.)
For reviews, we might be able to plug into the VS extension gallery. I agree they're not a huge deal, but nice to have. We mainly use them for:
- engaging with users who don't have a specific issue to report, but just had a generally poor experience
- providing assurance to new users about the viability of NTVS (assuming good reviews, of course)
-
getting an "emotional pulse" of a release - reviews typically represent a user's gut feelings about the entire experience, whereas issues represent a segment of the experience.