Moving away from reporting to RH bugzilla and adopting pure upstream reporting mantra.

Chris Murphy lists at colorremedies.com
Tue Sep 24 16:13:30 UTC 2013


On Sep 24, 2013, at 4:07 AM, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:53:46AM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>> On 09/24/2013 06:45 AM, Dan Horák wrote:
>>> we are missing a tool that would clone the Fedora bugs from bugzilla to
>>> upstream bug trackers. I think the removal of the manual work needed to
>>> copy all the information from bugzilla to upstream tracker would be
>>> appreciated by the packagers. I have the idea for the tool for quite
>>> some time, but didn't find the time to realize it
>> 
>> I requested that myself a while back but that died with RH bugzilla
>> team ( just so we could at least have bidirectional communication
>> between 2 bugzilla instances )
> 
> The problem is doing it right, so it only propagates useful information,
> without too much bloat.  When I e.g. see what kind of bloat push Debian
> bugtrackers into upstream bugzillas, the useful information there is
> hidden in tons of email headers for every comment,

Right.  It's no good to automate hassling or cluttering upstream bug reports. 
> 
> So perhaps better is just to add to the upstream bz a link to the downstream
> bugzilla, with optional comment or something, not duplicating everything
> from the downstream bugzilla.

That's what I was thinking. RHBZ creates upstream bug, both bugs get crosslinked URLs, the upstream bug gets summary, package-version info, and the Description (the thing before the first comment), and that's it. If upstream wants to comment in the downstream bug, they do it manually, and vice versa. 

Best would also be a checkbox "Report Upstream" that can have a package specific default, so upstreams can opine on whether they want the box checked by default or not. e.g. maybe kernel devs would say no, because they seem to be rather vigilant looking at both redhat.com and kernel.org bz's. On the other hand, linking might eliminate some amount of duplicate entries.

In any case, some description pushed upstream is needed for searches to avoid duplicate entries. And on the other hand, the two entires shouldn't mirror each other's added comments. That'd get ugly quickly.


Chris Murphy


More information about the test mailing list