On Wed, 3 Jul 2019, 00:56 Luigi Toscano, <luigi.tosc...@tiscali.it> wrote:

> Hi,

Hi Luigi,

> one of the main point of the gitlab migration has been so far the
> replacement
> for phabricator. We didn't discuss about bug tracking.
> Despite this, I've seen a few projects using issues as replacement for
> bugzilla.
> We can all debate which is better, whether bugzilla or the gitlab issues,
> but
> please consider that:
> - having to ways to report a bug makes like of everyone more complicated
> for
> users reporting bug who need to find the proper place, and for bug triager
> - drkonqi still continue to report to bugzilla. Future versions of drkonqi
> can
> be fixed to support the new system and we would need also a proxy for older
> versions of drkonqi, but until such thing exist, a migration is out of
> question.

Or just apply the 2 year rule - it would mean waiting 2 years after
shipping a Dr Konqi with support for the new way though.

> My suggestion right now is to disable issues completely, or if they need
> to be
> enable to allow us to replace phabricator tasks, then to reduce their
> scope to
> this.

The intention originally when we started planning the migration to Gitlab
was that issues within Gitlab would be treated as an equivalent to
Phabricator Tasks - ie. for internal discussions only.

While I know there are people who do want to investigate the possibility of
dropping Bugzilla at some point, that is not something we are pursuing at
this time, and the intention is most certainly for user facing reports to
continue being done using bugs.kde.org (Bugzilla).

> --
> Luigi



Reply via email to