https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43806
--- Comment #3 from MZMcBride <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #1) > We cannot reliably say that all Bugzilla component names also match the names > in the code repository, plus that all Bugzilla components are in Gerrit/Git. Do you have an example of the former? (In reply to comment #2) > I'm against maintaining a manual list with code repo <-> Bugzilla component > matches (WONTFIX) because nobody would maintain it. Hmm, I think it would be maintained if it were on a wiki page. You'd only need a dictionary for the tricky (edge) cases. The code would assume that there's a direct relationship between component name in Bugzilla and repo name in Gerrit unless specified in a small dictionary that could be maintained on a wiki page on Meta-Wiki or mediawiki.org or elsewhere. I don't think the maintenance burden is too high. I think it's important to provide developers and other interested parties with easy access to the relevant code when looking at a bug. Currently there doesn't seem to be any easy access at all. Even (simply) exposing the component description would be useful, as it usually includes a link to the extension page on mediawiki.org. I have to imagine that this issue has come up in other bug trackers. Surely developers (who are notoriously lazy) want a way to easily view relevant code (on ViewVC, gitweb, etc.) from a bug. How do other bug trackers solve this problem? An additional input field? Something else? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
