bugzilla.redhat.com vs upstream bug trackers

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Mon Jun 17 19:22:53 UTC 2013

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:29:11 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 06/17/2013 05:19 PM, Haïkel Guémar wrote:
> > If using Red Hat Bugzilla instance is the problem, then it's worth
> > taking a look at having our own bugtracker.
> > In fact, it's already been examined by our awesome infrastructure
> > team and i personnally believe that we should help them fixing that.
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Fedora_bug_tracker
> If we move we should remove epel since it's RHEL specific ( it
> belongs in RH Bugzilla ) well any arguments containing RHEL are moot
> Fedora != RHEL

I don't follow your logic there, but yes we would have to determine
what we want to do with epel bugs if we moved anything. 

> The argument could be made we should use that instance instead of all 
> tracker instances on fedora hosted and I would recommend we stick
> with mozilla ( since many upstream use it ) and or apply for [1] and
> move to atlassian jira  maybe since we have a strong java team.

No go. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure_Licensing

I'd like to note that we were/are just exploring this idea, there's
nothing decided or set in stone. If you have constructive, concrete
things to consider, please do add them to the wiki page. 


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130617/6baaed21/attachment.sig>

More information about the devel mailing list