Separate Fedora bug tracker?

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 13:23 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-17 at 10:09 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 19:48 -0400, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> > 
> > > Thoughts on any of this?
> > 
> > Sorry, one further - the recurring issue that always comes up when
> > things like this are in question is to remember this is Red Hat's
> > Bugzilla as well as Fedora's. Some things that would make sense for a
> > project like Fedora wouldn't make sense for Red Hat. I'd like to have a
> > separate Fedora bug tracking system, but wishes ain't horses and it's
> > not me who'd have to do the work...
> 
> I would be very surprised if Bugzilla did not support setting different
> policies for the Fedora "project".

I'm not an expert in the area, but I believe there's limitations to the
amount of configuration that can be done at that level. Certainly some
kind, but you don't have complete flexibility.

> I'm not sure what would be gained by having a fully separate Fedora bug
> tracker.  On the other hand, there are definite practical conveniences
> to having Fedora and RHEL in the same bug tracker: user accounts are
> shared and direct dependencies can be entered among Fedora, RHEL, and
> Security Response bugs.

Which most of the time are done wrong, which annoys the crap out of some
of us. Me, at least. I hate having RHEL bugs depending on Fedora bugs
(or vice versa) when there's no reason why they should...
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net