[llvm-dev] Proposal for an alternative bugtracking workflow

[Ilya Biryukov via llvm-dev]

Hi LLVM community,

As discussed earlier, we in the clangd land feel that buganizer does not
address the clangd's needs as a bug-tracking system.

In our previous attempt to raise this on llvm-dev [1] we shared our idea to
put the clangd issue tracker on GitHub. The participants raised multiple
concerns, including the migration costs, whether GitHub is the right choice
as an issue tracker, whether moving issues for clangd only will result in
unwanted community fragmentation and others

These are all valid concerns, but a big portion of the thread was focused
on migration of the existing bugs, community fragmentation issues, etc.
We feel it would also be useful to ask a more focused question on whether
using the proposed **workflow** of tracking issues in multiple GitHub
projects is a good fit for LLVM, ignoring the migration costs and such.
Please note we're not proposing to migrate from Bugzilla right away or
saying that's the only way to go forward with LLVM issue tracking, we
merely want to understand what the community thinks about the proposed
workflow and *potential* advantages and disadvantages of using it.

To reiterate, our proposal was to create a repository for each of the LLVM
subprojects under the official LLVM GitHub account, e.g.
github.com/llvm/clangd.
This repository would be run by the part of the community working on that
project and would host the issue tracker for the project. The existing '
github.com/llvm/llvm-project' repository will be used to solely host the
code, it will not have an issue tracker associated with it.

Do you think this workflow would be a good fit for tracking bugs in LLVM?

[1]: http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2018-October/127068.html
-- 
Regards,
Ilya Biryukov
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190114/da69c535/attachment.html>