On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:01 AM Petr Viktorin <pvikt...@redhat.com> wrote:
> It's only automatic for Bugzilla. If upstream is not using the Fedora/RH > bugzilla (which it shouldn't, really), a URL for the upstream discussion > needs to be added manually. And of course you can open a portingdb > ticket for that. > > > Nowadays I don't want portingdb to have too much info about upstream, > because: > - Upstream discussions for a projects are usually not hard to find. > - Bugzilla is Fedora-specific, so people from other OSs won't look there. > - portingdb is mainly used by the Fedora Python SIG; both upstreams and > other Fedorans aren't likely to look there. > > So I prefer portingdb having just an URL for the upstream discussion – > and even that isn't needed if interested people can easily find that > discussion. > > So if there are pending issues, patches, or merge requests upstream related to the python3 porting effort there should be a portingdb ticket created requesting a link to the upstream discussion/status be added? And I should *not* create a bugzilla ticket blocking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322027 like I did with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1492382 ? Or perhaps both should/could be done as perhaps they are used by separate teams tracking different status? Just trying to get a handle on the preferred route. Thanks, Troy > > Once there's a py3-compatible release upstream, it's enough to open a > bugzilla for the Fedora package and link it to the tracking bug (see > [Python 3 Bug Filing]). Then portingdb will eventually update. > > > [Python 3 Bug Filing]: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pviktori/Python_3_Bug_Filing > > -- > Petr Viktorin >
_______________________________________________ python-devel mailing list -- python-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to python-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
