comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the comps component and use the Pagure repo for all comps issues. In the case where a change in comps is necessary for Bugzilla-based processes (e.g. blockers), we can use a bug in the distribution component.
I don't see a benefit to having the Bugzilla component for comps as a general matter, but if there's a good argument for keeping it, let me know. Otherwise, I plan to disable the component on Thursday 29 September.
[1] https://pagure.io/fedora-comps
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:02 AM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the comps component and use the Pagure repo for all comps issues. In the case where a change in comps is necessary for Bugzilla-based processes (e.g. blockers), we can use a bug in the distribution component.
I don't see a benefit to having the Bugzilla component for comps as a general matter, but if there's a good argument for keeping it, let me know. Otherwise, I plan to disable the component on Thursday 29 September.
The main reason would be blocker review, but I'm not sure how often it comes up in the past few cycles.
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:03 AM Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com wrote:
The main reason would be blocker review, but I'm not sure how often it comes up in the past few cycles.
Rarely, which is why I think using distribution as a proxy is fine. For the curious, a total of 16 comps bugs have ever been a part of the blocker or freeze exception process. Here's a list of release with non-zero comps bugs in the blocker/FE processes:
F18: 4 F19: 1 F21: 2 F22: 1 F23: 1 F24: 1 F28: 2 F30: 1 F32: 1 F34: 2
Ben Cotton wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:03 AM Neal Gompa ngompa13@gmail.com wrote:
The main reason would be blocker review, but I'm not sure how often it comes up in the past few cycles.
Rarely, which is why I think using distribution as a proxy is fine. For the curious, a total of 16 comps bugs have ever been a part of the blocker or freeze exception process. Here's a list of release with non-zero comps bugs in the blocker/FE processes:
F18: 4 F19: 1 F21: 2 F22: 1 F23: 1 F24: 1 F28: 2 F30: 1 F32: 1 F34: 2
That was almost every release, and in fact an average of around one such bug per release cycle.
Kevin Kofler
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 10:01:36AM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
comps, the system of XML files used to put packages into functional groups is hosted on a Pagure repo[1] but also has a Bugzilla component. In the interests of simplicity, I propose to disable the comps component and use the Pagure repo for all comps issues. In the case where a change in comps is necessary for Bugzilla-based processes (e.g. blockers), we can use a bug in the distribution component.
I don't see a benefit to having the Bugzilla component for comps as a general matter, but if there's a good argument for keeping it, let me know. Otherwise, I plan to disable the component on Thursday 29 September.
Amusingly I think we in the past discussed closing the pagure project to issues and using bugzilla only. ;)
But I'm fine doing either one... having one place for bugs instead of two is a good thing.
What will be done with the existing open bugzilla bugs? (There's some overlap between the two it looks like). Close and ask them to refile? Refile for them?
kevin
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 12:49 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
Amusingly I think we in the past discussed closing the pagure project to issues and using bugzilla only. ;)
I'd entertain arguments for doing that. But I think the "have the issues with the 'code'" aspect is more valuable in this particular case.
What will be done with the existing open bugzilla bugs? (There's some overlap between the two it looks like). Close and ask them to refile? Refile for them?
I'll close ones that already exist in Pagure as DUPLICATE and re-file the others on behalf of the reporter. Looking at the current issues, it's probably worth doing a cleanup round on them post-release anyway.
-- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Fedora Program Manager Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
Ben Cotton wrote:
I'll close ones that already exist in Pagure as DUPLICATE
Bugzilla does not allow you to use the DUPLICATE status without giving a concrete Bugzilla bug ID of which the bug is allegedly a duplicate, so you cannot use it for bugs that are duplicated on external bug trackers.
Kevin Kofler
On Wed, Sep 21, 2022 at 10:22 AM Kevin Kofler via devel devel@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
Bugzilla does not allow you to use the DUPLICATE status without giving a concrete Bugzilla bug ID of which the bug is allegedly a duplicate,
Good point. I'll use another closure type then. The point is: I'll go through the existing BZs and handle them appropriately.
-
Ben Cotton -
Kevin Fenzi -
Kevin Kofler -
Neal Gompa