> We could back up the Bugzilla issues somewhere and refer to them or link to > them as needed in Apache NetBeans JIRA.
This could be good enough. But what is going to happen with the exception reporter tool? Will it be linked to Jira for automatic ticket creation? Will apache host the statistics/exceptions tracker DB ? In other words, what happens with stuff like this: http://statistics.netbeans.org/analytics/detail.do?id=228820 ? Martin 2017-10-13 13:55 GMT+02:00 Cezariusz Marek <[email protected]>: > I think it would be way more work to copy all valid issues by hand than > just import all *open* issues from Bugzilla to JIRA and evaluate them > later. Moving manually will probably lose votes, comments, and maybe other > valuable information. > > -- > Cezariusz Marek > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Geertjan Wielenga [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 1:36 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: NetBeans 9 release date > > On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Antonio Vieiro <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > BTW, will all the issues at netbeans.org be migrated to JIRA? > > > > There are various schools of thought on this question. > > We could move all issues over. > > Many of the issues are old or out of date or irrelevant, i.e., for > features that are no longer there, etc. It would be a massive task for > someone to, once the issues are moved, evaluate all of them. > > It's certainly doable. > > A different approach is to create issues from scratch, i.e., the issues we > create in Apache NetBeans JIRA from scratch will be issues that the Apache > NetBeans community cares about, versus heaps of issues in the Oracle > NetBeans Bugzilla that maybe no one in Apache NetBeans will be concerned > about but that would need to be evaluated anyway if we were to migrate > everything over to Apache NetBeans JIRA. > > We could back up the Bugzilla issues somewhere and refer to them or link > to them as needed in Apache NetBeans JIRA. > > Anyway, multiple approaches and if we can't agree on a specific way > forward we could vote on it. > > Gj > >
