[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception)

Oops, let me finish my thought on this one:

> > > 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.

It helps when the problem space is well-defined. My sense (and I may
well be overlooking things here) is that currently there is a vague
(and accurate) sense that Fedora bugzilla is really sub-optimal, but
that no one really has a strong sense of how to fix it. I just want
everyone to not underestimate the pain of hacking bugzilla (the
codebase is vastly better than it was, but still grody) or to
underestimate the benefits that could come from good practices in an
integrated system, that admittedly don't happen right now, but which
will never happen in a loosely-coupled system without the man-decades
of work (soon to be man-century, still with no appreciably useful
result) which has been put into launchpad.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]