[Pulp-dev] RFC: new redmine project for pulp 3 ?

[Michael Hrivnak]

In a discussion this morning about how to tag issues in redmine as pulp 2
vs pulp 3 MVP vs pulp 3 after-MVP, I floated the idea of creating a new
project in redmine for pulp 3. Let's continue that discussion here. I'm not
sure if it's worthwhile, but it seems to have enough merit to think through
the pros and cons. I only suggest it in case it can make our lives easier.
If there's not a clear benefit, let's not do it.

State of the "Pulp" project in redmine now:
- There is a huge backlog of pulp 2 issues, most of which will become
irrelevant or implicitly resolved by pulp 3. We'll need to do a big purge
eventually.
- Nearly all new issues added will be for pulp 3. Only bug reports and a
very small number of RFEs will be added for pulp 2.

Since pulp 3 is such a major refactor/rewrite, it might make sense to have
hard separation between pulp 2 and 3 issues. Within a separate pulp 3 issue
tracker, we could identify what qualifies for the MVP using a tag, and only
move over issues from the pulp 2 tracker that are identified as relevant.

Another way to look at it is that pulp 2 and 3 will be so different from
each other that there's little if any benefit to having their issues
co-mingled. Life could be simpler keeping them separate.

Potential Downsides:
- It might be some work to get a new "project" setup in redmine.
- If we do it for platform, would we also do it for all of the plugins and
other remine projects? It might still be worth it, but that increases the
complexity of this change.
- Does it impact any team processes, automation, etc?
- Will it be confusing to users? I think we could keep that straight, and
it's easy to move an issue from one project to another if someone files a
bug in the wrong place.

Thoughts?

Michael
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20161107/8b03b001/attachment.htm>