Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception)

[Paul W. Frields]

On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> On Jan 7, 2008 2:11 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> wrote:
> > Benefits:
> >
> > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions
> > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other
> >   upstream bug trackers
> > - able to wipe out old bugs
> 
> RH bugzilla needs to do all these things too, even if RHEL Engineering
> doesn't realize it yet. I'd suggest that convincing RH of this,
> instead of just breaking away, is one of those ways that Fedora can
> help ensure (or ideally increase) RH's continued investment in Fedora.

I'm not sure they don't realize it, but as always the limited number of
cycles prevails.

> > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora
> >   doesn't need
> 
> I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that
> Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of
> staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side
> 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve
> this.

Would these solutions be limited to a "read-only" scope?

> > Demerits:
> >
> > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping
> > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla
> > - would need to run our own instance
> 
> - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development
> and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage
> that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in
> RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting
> off your nose to spite your face.

+1.  Is it just me, or does the scariness of moving the build systems,
etc., outside the wall seem now so much less in comparison?  Scary =
hard_work + deepthought is OK, but scary = unknown_pitfalls ... not so
much.

> > - would wipe out old bugs
> 
> Wiping out old bugs is a good thing; on balance, unless you have
> *bazillions* of testers, most old bugs cost more time to regularly
> test/recheck/update/etc. than they are worth.

True, but of course this should be concomitant with necessary steps to
keep their reporters interested and engaged in Fedora wherever possible.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
           Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20080107/52077640/attachment.sig>