On 02/17/2017 11:24 AM, Atin Mukherjee wrote:
On Thu, 16 Feb 2017 at 06:36, Shyam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 02/15/2017 04:27 PM, Amye Scavarda wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Shyam <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
> That being said, here's my take: this seems hasty and doing this in a
> few weeks seems like asking for trouble.
>
> Bugzilla has a number of features that we're currently using, and some
> that we're really going to need as a project. Being able to have a
> feature that whines at you if you haven't touched an issue in some
time?
> Helpful.
So, BZ features we (myself and a few others) considered most of what we
use (clones, release tracker, keywords etc.). Yes, there are folks who
may have setup whines and other such, but we will lose that.
We need people to speak up on what they may lose or what they want, so
that we can evaluate it.
Personally I am not in favour of moving to 100% github model over
bugzilla as I can form almost any queries out of it. What it gives me a
better tracking ability especially being a maintainer. Until and unless
I can do the same granular things with github as I do for bugzilla, I am
not convinced (Proove me wrong and I do admit that I am a bugzilla
expert but not github!).
"Give me your queries... I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
(apologies if this is in bad taste!)
Well I do not promise to convert all your queries to github, as I myself
am a bugzilla person, getting into github at the moment.
The queries are important, and what can and cannot be achieved are only
through labels, and here is a thin line we need to walk, too much
labeling or vice-verse, and things will get out of hand pretty quickly.
Let's get some examples here, and draw parallels in github and see how
much we lose/gain.
I think moving to a github model in maintaining releases and status of
important features is a good step taken, but we should continue to use
bugzilla when it comes to bug fixes.
Yes, Sankarshan seems to be echoing the same sentiment as above.
Here is what the above means to us all,
- Contributors need to be aware of bugs *and* issues
- Bugs here refer to BZ bugs, of course to handle bugs in the code
- Issues for features and major changes
- gerrit, WorkerAnt need to still be updated to be able to accept both
- IOW, some of the workflow defined will not change
- We will possibly not use release labels though, features appear in
master and get into a release when said release is branched
- Features that are backported, need to either go in as bug fixes, or
just use issues to backport the same (we need to arrive at a decision here)
- Some tools pointed out by Niels may need to query both BZ and github
for a complete picture
Are we willing to accept this additional development and release workflow?
I am not closing the doors yet on moving out of bugzilla, consider the
above deferring it till we reach some consensus and clearly state why
bugzilla is a MUST.
Shyam
_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers
