Project Management migration

Migrate from ]project-open[ to Asana

Field-level mapping, validation, and rollback between ]project-open[ and Asana. We move data and schema; workflows are rebuilt natively in Asana.

]project-open[ logo

]project-open[

Source

Asana

Destination

Asana logo

Compatibility

42%

5 of 12

objects map 1:1 between ]project-open[ and Asana.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

4-8 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Migrating from ]project-open[ to Asana means moving from an open-source PostgreSQL-backed ERP-PM hybrid to a cloud-native REST-API-first project management platform. The architectural shift is substantial: ]project-open[ stores every entity in a single PostgreSQL database with acs_objects inheritance and acs_rels join tables, while Asana exposes a clean task-centric REST API organized around Projects, Tasks, Sections, and Teams. We handle the extraction side by connecting directly to the PostgreSQL backend using read-only credentials, resolving acs_rels parent-child hierarchies, and normalizing the 't'/'f' boolean character fields. We handle the load side through the Asana REST API with batch chunking and rate-limit backoff. The most significant gap is financial data: ]project-open[ tracks Costs, Invoices, and Timesheets as first-class objects, while Asana stores financial metadata only as custom fields attached to tasks. We document the financial mapping and deliver it as structured custom field definitions for your admin to activate post-migration.

Field-level fidelity

Every standard and custom field arrives verified.

Schema-aware mapping

AI proposes the map; you confirm before any record moves.

Relationships preserved

Parent–child, lookups, and ownership stay linked.

Full activity history

Calls, emails, meetings — with original timestamps.

Attachments & notes

Documents, uploads, and inline notes move with the record.

Why teams make this switch

Two sides of the same decision

Leaving

]project-open[ logo

]project-open[

What's pushing teams away

  • The user interface is dated and the learning curve is steep, requiring significant training investment before teams can operate productively — a common reason teams migrate to more modern SaaS alternatives.
  • Self-hosting and maintaining ]project-open[ demands dedicated technical resources for server management, upgrades, and troubleshooting, which becomes a burden for organizations without an in-house DevOps capability.
  • Performance degrades with large data volumes and complex module configurations, pushing organizations with growing datasets toward platforms that handle scale more gracefully without intensive tuning.
  • Enterprise support and commercial extension costs become expensive at scale, eroding the cost advantage that initially attracted teams to the open-source Community Edition.

Choosing

Asana logo

Asana

What's pulling them in

  • Organizations with distributed teams cite Asana's multiple project views (List, Board, Calendar, Timeline) as the primary reason for adoption, allowing each team member to work in their preferred interface without changing the underlying data.
  • The platform's 100+ native integrations with tools like Slack, Google Drive, Salesforce, and Microsoft Teams reduce context-switching and keep work synchronized across the stack.
  • Small teams and non-profits value the free plan's generous limits: unlimited projects and tasks for up to 15 team members with basic views, enabling teams to validate fit before committing to a paid tier.
  • Marketing and creative teams specifically praise Asana's visual project organization, reporting dashboards, and timeline views for managing cross-functional campaign workflows.
  • Project managers report that Asana's dependency management and workload views help surface bottlenecks before they derail deadlines.

Object mapping

How ]project-open[ objects map to Asana

Each row shows how a ]project-open[ object lands in Asana, including any object-level transformations, lookup resolution, or schema-design dependencies.

Typical mapping — final map is confirmed during the sample migration step.

]project-open[

Project

maps to

Asana

Project

1:1
Fully supported

Projects in ]project-open[ are the central acs_objects entity keyed by project_id with status governed by object_status_id. We preserve the full project hierarchy by traversing acs_rels to resolve parent-child project assignments, then map each distinct hierarchy level to a separate Asana Project. Project status (potential, active, closed) maps to a custom status field in Asana since Asana Projects do not have a native status property beyond archiving. The project_name becomes the Asana Project name and description maps directly.

]project-open[

Task / Sub-task

maps to

Asana

Task

1:1
Fully supported

Tasks in ]project-open[ are stored as separate task_id records referencing the project tree with parent-child nesting. We traverse the task hierarchy and flatten sub-tasks into Asana Subtasks linked to the parent Task via the parent_id reference. Task assignment, priority, and due date map to assignee, Custom Field priority enum, and due_on respectively. Any ]project-open[ Task custom attributes are discovered during the pre-migration attribute pass and mapped to Asana custom fields before import.

]project-open[

Company

maps to

Asana

Team + Custom Field

1:1
Fully supported

Companies in ]project-open[ are im_companies objects with company_name, company_status_id, and type classification stored via object_type_id. Asana has no native company or account object. We map company records to Asana Teams (one Team per company) using company_name as the Team name, with company status and type stored as custom fields on the Team or as custom fields on the Projects where that company is relevant. Customer admin reviews and approves the company-to-team mapping strategy during scoping.

]project-open[

Ticket (im_tickets)

maps to

Asana

Task + Custom Fields

lossy
Fully supported

Tickets in ]project-open[ use im_tickets with ticket_status_id and ticket_type_id integer keys, plus threaded message history via associated tables. Asana has no dedicated ticket object. We map each ticket to an Asana Task with a ticket_type custom field (single-select enum matching the ]project-open[ ticket_type_id labels), a ticket_status custom field, and assignee from the ticket owner. The conversation thread migrates as Task comments in chronological order. If Service Cloud is active in the destination environment, Case is a better fit and we adjust the mapping accordingly.

]project-open[

Cost / Invoice (im_costs)

maps to

Asana

Custom Fields on Task

lossy
Fully supported

Financial records in ]project-open[ live in im_costs with variable_cost_p as a boolean 't'/'f' char field, plus amount, cost_type, and billing_status columns. Asana has no native financial or invoicing object. We map cost and invoice data as custom fields on the Asana Task that represents the corresponding work package: cost_amount (number), cost_type (enum), billable (boolean), and invoice_status (enum). The customer configures these custom fields on the relevant Projects during scoping. Actual invoice PDFs from ]project-open[ are not migratable as standalone records and are delivered as a file inventory for manual re-upload.

]project-open[

Timesheet Entry

maps to

Asana

Task + Custom Fields

lossy
Fully supported

Timesheet hours in ]project-open[ are stored as cost entries linked to users and projects, with date, billing type, and hours logged. Asana has no native timesheet object; the Timesheets feature in Asana is a paid feature that tracks time entries without financial cost modeling. We map timesheet data as custom fields on Tasks (hours_logged, timesheet_date, billing_type) and preserve the user-to-project linkage as task assignees. Asana's native time tracking can be enabled if the customer wants time logged within Asana post-migration, but the historical cost values from ]project-open[ are preserved only as metadata.

]project-open[

User

maps to

Asana

User / Member

1:1
Fully supported

Users in ]project-open[ are stored across acs_objects and application-specific tables with permissions and group memberships via acs_rels privilege hierarchies. We map user_id, names, and email to Asana Members by email match. The customer's admin provisions Asana user accounts before migration. We flag any ]project-open[ permission or role that has no direct Asana equivalent (OpenACS privilege hierarchies vs Team Member/Admin/Guest roles) in the reconciliation report for admin review. Inactive users are imported as Asana guests if historical assignment records must be preserved.

]project-open[

Custom Fields (dynamic attributes)

maps to

Asana

Custom Fields

lossy
Mapping required

]project-open[ allows unrestricted dynamic custom attributes per Business Object stored beyond the standard schema columns. These are discovered only by querying the dynamic attribute storage for each object type. We run a full attribute discovery pass against all target object types before designing the mapping specification. Each discovered custom attribute is typed (text, number, date, boolean, enum) and recreated as an Asana custom field. Any formulas, cross-object validations, or computed defaults in ]project-open[ do not migrate — we note them in the handoff document for the admin to implement as Rules or custom fields post-migration.

]project-open[

Office / Location

maps to

Asana

Custom Fields

lossy
Mapping required

Offices in ]project-open[ store physical location data and link to companies and projects via acs_rels. Asana has no native location entity. We preserve office name, address, and timezone as text or enum custom fields on the relevant Projects or Teams. The customer decides during scoping whether location is stored per-project or per-team based on their reporting structure.

]project-open[

Category / Classification

maps to

Asana

Custom Field (enum) or Tag

lossy
Fully supported

Categories in ]project-open[ are stored in a hierarchical category system used to classify objects across ticket types, project sectors, cost types, and more. Each category tree has integer category_id values that map to string labels. We resolve all category_id references to their string labels during transformation, then create Asana custom fields of enum type (single-select or multi-select depending on the category usage) with options matching the source labels. Parent-child category hierarchies in ]project-open[ flatten to a flat option list in Asana since Asana does not support hierarchical custom field options.

]project-open[

Document / Attachment

maps to

Asana

Attachment / Link

1:1
Fully supported

Documents in ]project-open[ are stored as separate objects with references in acs_objects; binary files may be in the filesystem or database depending on configuration. We identify file storage locations during discovery, extract file references, and migrate document URLs as Asana Task Attachments or as Link fields pointing to the original document repository. Binary file migration requires customer approval and may involve file transfer logistics beyond the standard migration scope.

]project-open[

Configuration Item

maps to

Asana

Custom Fields on Task

lossy
Fully supported

Configuration items in ]project-open[ track IT assets and their relationships as typed Business Objects with custom attributes. Asana has no native CI or asset management object. We map CI type, key attributes, and any dependency relationships as custom fields on the relevant Task, along with a CI identifier field for reference. The full dependency graph from ]project-open[ is documented separately as a written inventory for the customer's IT team to implement in a dedicated CMDB or asset management tool if required.

Gotchas + challenges

What specifically takes care here

Platform-specific issues from each side, plus the pair-specific challenges that don't show up on either platform's page on its own.

]project-open[ logo

]project-open[ gotchas

High

No public API forces direct PostgreSQL database access

Medium

Boolean fields use 't'/'f' char values not native booleans

Medium

Complex acs_objects inheritance and acs_rels traversal

Medium

Custom fields require pre-migration field discovery and mapping

Low

Date and datetime storage formats vary across modules

Asana logo

Asana gotchas

High

Automation rules have no export representation

High

API rate limits cap bulk migration throughput

Medium

Portfolios are view-only objects that do not hold data

Medium

Custom field enum options cannot be updated via API

Low

Subtasks do not appear in project views by default

Pair-specific challenges

  • ]project-open[ has no public API — direct PostgreSQL access required

    ]project-open[ exposes no documented public REST or SOAP API. Every migration connects directly to the underlying PostgreSQL database using read-only credentials and network access the customer provisions. This means the migration cannot run API-only and depends on infrastructure access the customer must authorize and secure. We establish a scoped, read-only database connection during the discovery phase and execute all data extraction through parameterized SQL queries against the well-documented OpenACS schema. The customer must also open network access from our environment to the database server, which may require VPN or jump-host configuration.

  • Financial and invoice data has no native home in Asana

    ]project-open[ tracks Costs, Invoices, and Timesheet financials as first-class database objects with billing status, cost types, and variable-cost flags. Asana has no financial, invoicing, or cost accounting object. We map financial metadata as custom fields on Tasks, but the structural separation of costs from tasks in ]project-open[ is lost: there is no standalone invoice record, no cost rollup across projects, and no native billing workflow in Asana. We document every financial attribute we map and every attribute we drop, so the customer admin can assess what needs to live in a separate finance tool post-migration.

  • Boolean 't'/'f' char fields require explicit type conversion

    Throughout the ]project-open[ schema, boolean fields are stored as bpchar(1) columns with the '_p' postfix containing literal 't' or 'f' characters rather than native PostgreSQL boolean types. variable_cost_p, is_template_p, and similar fields all use this pattern. During transformation we apply explicit CASE logic to convert these to proper true/false values before writing to the Asana API, which expects boolean types. Without this conversion, literal 't' or 'f' strings land in Asana custom fields expecting true/false, causing import rejection or incorrect field values.

  • Project hierarchy depth exceeds Asana's two-level structure

    ]project-open[ supports multi-level project hierarchies through acs_objects parent-child relationships with unlimited nesting depth. Asana Projects have one level of nesting (Projects containing Subprojects) but no native support for three or more hierarchy levels. We handle this by mapping each ]project-open[ hierarchy level to a separate top-level Asana Project and using a naming convention or custom field to preserve the original hierarchy path. The customer reviews the flattening strategy during scoping to ensure the organizational structure is represented intelligibly in Asana.

  • Custom field discovery is required before mapping can begin

    ]project-open[ allows unrestricted dynamic custom attributes per Business Object stored outside the main table columns. These attributes are not discoverable by inspecting the table schema alone — they require a targeted query against the dynamic attribute storage for each object type. We run a full attribute discovery pass before writing any mapping specification. Without this step, custom fields silently drop during import, which is particularly damaging for ticketing and project classification data that relies on custom attributes for workflow routing.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful ]project-open[ to Asana data migration

  1. Discovery and infrastructure access

    We audit the source ]project-open[ PostgreSQL database to catalog all active modules (project management, CRM, ticketing, financials, timesheets), project hierarchy depth, user count, custom dynamic attributes per object type, and any legacy or inactive data partitions. We require the customer to provision read-only database credentials and network access to the PostgreSQL server. In parallel, we confirm the target Asana workspace structure: Teams, Project templates, and existing custom field library. The discovery output is a written migration scope document with object counts, a preliminary mapping draft, and a list of infrastructure access requirements for the customer to fulfill.

  2. Schema design and custom field provisioning

    We design the Asana destination schema before any data moves. This includes creating the Teams that correspond to the most important ]project-open[ company or organizational unit groupings, provisioning Projects from the source project hierarchy (with flattening strategy documented and approved), and creating custom fields for financial metadata (cost_amount, cost_type, billable, invoice_status), ticket metadata (ticket_type, ticket_status), timesheet data (hours_logged), and any discovered dynamic attributes from ]project-open[. Custom fields are typed (number, date, enum, multi-enum, boolean) to match the source data format. Schema is validated in an Asana Sandbox or test workspace before production provisioning.

  3. Database extraction and transformation

    We execute SQL queries against the ]project-open[ PostgreSQL database to extract all target objects. For each object type we join against acs_objects to capture creation dates, modification dates, and object status; we traverse acs_rels to resolve parent-child relationships for projects, user-project assignments, and company-contact links; we apply explicit CASE conversion for all '_p' boolean char fields ('t' -> true, 'f' -> false); we resolve category_id integer keys to their string labels from the category hierarchy; we normalize all datetime values to UTC and log the source format for each field; and we run the custom attribute discovery pass to capture every dynamic attribute across all object types. The extraction runs with read-only credentials only.

  4. Sandbox validation and reconciliation

    We load the transformed dataset into a pre-production Asana workspace using the Asana REST API. We validate record counts per object type, spot-check 25-50 records for field-level accuracy against the source database, verify that project hierarchy flattening produces an intelligible structure, and confirm that custom field values land in the correct fields with correct types. The customer reviews the sandbox output and signs off before production migration begins. Any mapping corrections happen at this stage.

  5. Production migration via Asana REST API

    We run production migration in dependency order: Teams and Project structure first, then Projects with hierarchy flattened and parent references resolved, then Tasks with subtask nesting and assignee resolution, then Tickets mapped to Tasks with conversation threads as comments, then financial and timesheet metadata as custom field values, then custom dynamic attributes as custom field values. We use the Asana REST API with batch chunking and exponential backoff on rate-limit responses (1,500 requests per minute for Bulk API; 90 requests per minute for standard REST API). Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report before the next phase begins.

  6. Cutover, delta sync, and handoff documentation

    We freeze writes to the source system during the cutover window, run a final delta migration for any records modified during the migration window, then enable Asana as the system of record. We deliver the Workflow and Automation inventory document (covering any Rules or automation patterns visible in the source) and the Financial Field Mapping document specifying every cost, invoice, and timesheet attribute mapped and every attribute that could not be mapped. We support a one-week hypercare window for reconciliation issues raised by the customer team. We do not rebuild automations or workflows as Asana Rules inside the migration scope; that is documented separately for the customer's admin.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

]project-open[ logo

]project-open[

Source

Strengths

  • Covers the full project lifecycle — planning, execution, financial controlling, and billing — in a single integrated platform.
  • Open-source Community Edition is free with no per-seat or per-feature licensing costs.
  • Modular architecture lets organizations activate only the functional areas they need, reducing complexity for simpler deployments.
  • ERP-level financial management including timesheet tracking, cost accounting, and invoice generation.
  • Strong documentation of the underlying data model allows technical teams to audit and understand data structure without vendor dependency.

Weaknesses

  • No public REST API — all migrations require direct database access to the PostgreSQL backend.
  • Interface is widely described as dated and difficult to navigate, increasing onboarding time significantly.
  • Self-hosting requires dedicated technical resources for installation, maintenance, and upgrades.
  • Performance degrades with large data volumes or heavily configured module setups.
  • Commercial Professional and Enterprise editions are required for advanced reporting and official support, adding cost that offsets the free Community Edition advantage.
Asana logo

Asana

Destination

Strengths

  • Unlimited projects and tasks on the free plan for teams up to 15 members.
  • 100+ native integrations including Salesforce, Slack, Google Drive, and Microsoft Teams.
  • Four distinct project views (List, Board, Calendar, Timeline) in a single interface.
  • Dependency management with start/end dates and predecessor links for critical path tracking.
  • Portfolio dashboards for executives to track cross-project status and workload.

Weaknesses

  • Per-seat pricing scales expensively: Advanced tier costs nearly double Starter for a 50-seat team.
  • API does not expose all UI-accessible data; some fields require screen-scraping for full fidelity.
  • Automation rule limits on lower tiers are restrictive, causing power users to upgrade or leave.
  • No native document/wiki capability forces teams to use external tools for knowledge management.
  • Rate limits (150 req/min on free, 1,500 req/min on paid) constrain bulk migration throughput.

Complexity grading

How hard is this migration?

Standard Project Management migration. 2 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

B

Overall complexity

Standard migration

Derived from compatibility, mapping clarity, API constraints, and data volume across ]project-open[ and Asana.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    2 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

  • Field mapping clarity

    C

    Field mapping is derived from defaults — final spec confirmed during the sample migration.

  • Timeline complexity

    B

    8-object category — typical timelines run 2–7 days end-to-end.

  • API constraints

    B

    ]project-open[: Not applicable — no public API.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

    ]project-open[ doesn't expose a bulk API — REST + parallelization used for high-volume runs.

Estimator

Estimate your ]project-open[ to Asana migration cost

Rule-based pricing — no per-record fees, no manual quotes. Migrations over 2M records are scoped individually.

Step 1

What are you migrating?

Pick a category, then your source and destination platforms.

Category

FAQ

Frequently asked questions about ]project-open[ to Asana data migrations

Answers to the questions buyers ask most during ]project-open[ to Asana migration scoping. Not seeing yours? Book a call.

Can't find your answer?

Walk through your ]project-open[ to Asana migration with a real engineer — 30 minutes, free, written quote within 24 hours.

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Most migrations land between four and eight weeks for accounts under 5,000 tasks and 50 projects with no financial module or complex project hierarchies. Migrations with large engagement or timesheet records, multi-level project hierarchies, multiple active ]project-open[ modules, or inventory of custom dynamic attributes move to eight to fourteen weeks because of the direct database traversal work, acs_rels relationship resolution, and custom field provisioning scope.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from ]project-open[.
Land in Asana, intact.

Tell us record counts and timeline. We'll come back with a written quote inside 1 business day — no commitment, no sales pitch.

Accuracy guarantee Rollback included Quote in 1 business day