On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 7:01 AM Petr Viktorin <pviktori@redhat.com> wrote:
It's only automatic for Bugzilla. If upstream is not using the Fedora/RH
bugzilla (which it shouldn't, really), a URL for the upstream discussion
needs to be added manually. And of course you can open a portingdb
ticket for that.


Nowadays I don't want portingdb to have too much info about upstream,
because:
- Upstream discussions for a projects are usually not hard to find.
- Bugzilla is Fedora-specific, so people from other OSs won't look there.
- portingdb is mainly used by the Fedora Python SIG; both upstreams and
other Fedorans aren't likely to look there.

So I prefer portingdb having just an URL for the upstream discussion –
and even that isn't needed if interested people can easily find that
discussion.


So if there are pending issues, patches, or merge requests upstream related to the python3 porting effort there should be a portingdb ticket created requesting a link to the upstream discussion/status be added? And I should *not* create a bugzilla ticket blocking https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1322027 like I did with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1492382 ?  Or perhaps both should/could be done as perhaps they are used by separate teams tracking different status?  Just trying to get a handle on the preferred route.

Thanks,
Troy
 

Once there's a py3-compatible release upstream, it's enough to open a
bugzilla for the Fedora package and link it to the tracking bug (see
[Python 3 Bug Filing]). Then portingdb will eventually update.


[Python 3 Bug Filing]:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pviktori/Python_3_Bug_Filing

--
Petr Viktorin