Why Discourse instead of Github Issues?

Why did Github decide to use Discourse for discuss.atom.io instead of improving Github Issues to account of those features Discourse has that are useful, but do not yet exist in Github Issues?

I ask this because, looking around on discuss.atom.io, a lot of what I see being discussed is remarkably similar to what people would discuss in Github Issues.

1 Like

On the Atom team we use GitHub Issues primarily for bug tracking. We wanted a public forum for people to discuss features, packages, themes and other things that are different from bugs. We stumbled upon discourse and really liked it, so we are trying it out!


Do you guys feel that some features of Discourse could be incorporated into Github Issues to consolidate the two communications channels without lessening the utility of Github Issues for bug tracking?

FWIW, the reason I’m asking this is because we’re open-sourcing a project in about a month, and someone on my team suggested using Discourse the same way you guys are using it for Atom. After showing up and looking around, I thought to myself that it looks an awful lot like an active Github Issues section for a popular open source project, but without the emphasis on the code artifacts.

1 Like

Well, if you want to use Discourse, our setup doc is almost easy now:

:arrow_right: https://github.com/discourse/discourse/blob/master/docs/INSTALL-cloud.md

There have been requests for GitHub to offer project discussion areas to complement the issues and other stuff:

But that’s a strategery thing for GitHub to decide, of course.


Operative word: Almost.
GitHub claims to want people using it… yea, right.

We just improved Discourse setup quite a lot!

Now you can take advantage of the ./discourse-setup command for guided setup (no more error prone hand editing of YAML files).

Or, if you are willing to use a Digital Ocean 2GB droplet, you can use the Discourse one-click app: