[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Tom Stellard via llvm-dev]

On 05/01/2020 01:40 PM, Wyatt Childers via llvm-dev wrote:
> I agree with everything said here, to me this seems like the most sane option. It seems like this approach could also be tested at a smaller scale if there are concerns about deleting a repo, to see if there is any observable effect.
> 
> While I haven't performed this particular trick on Github, based on my experience renaming and removing repositories, I wouldn't expect any significant issue to occur here. It certainly seems less problematic to me, than writing into existing issues (if any), and pull requests.
> 
> Using new issues, in a new repository not only has UI/UX benefits, but also ensures bugs are accurately transferred to a neutral party (presumably a bot account is going to be the creator of these issues).
> 
> I'm also going to add an additional concern/question I haven't seen mentioned. Has there been any research done, or strategy picked that would prevent those watching the llvm-project repository from getting spammed with thousands of emails/notifications? Perhaps the llvm organization has the ability to stop this, but smaller projects I've seen move to github issues have generally sent dozens-hundreds of emails in the process of importing their issues -- this seems notably undesirable. (The "bait-and-switch" tactic might actually help here as presumably the new repository could be hidden/unwatched until all issues are imported)
> 

Someone else also mentioned this to me off-list.  We don't have a good solution
for this right now other than asking people to turn off notifications, but
we'll continue to look into this.

-Tom

> Best,
> 
> Wyatt
> 
> On 5/1/20 1:06 PM, via llvm-dev wrote:
>> > Please reply to this proposal with your questions, comments, praise, or concerns.
>>  
>> I think it's by and large a good plan, but I'd consider it a largely unnecessary wart to copy issues into existing PRs (OP would always have the wrong user, etc.).
>>  
>> In a previous mail on this thread there was the proposal for a "bait-and-switch" style approach, which basically branches off from the proposal around step 5, by locking llvm/llvm-project, syncing all branches with llvm-bug-archive, and then deleting llvm-project and renaming the bug archive to llvm-project.
>>  
>> I understand that there are unknown unknowns about deleting and replacing the repo in place (maybe those could be allayed by some GH people?), but if that remains a show-stopper, then I was wondering if it has been considered that the new repo could simply just be called llvm/llvm? This would be a nice and short name which is not taken, and then llvm/llvm-project could be archived, and people would only have to change their git remote once. I hope such a suggestion is not seen as sacrilege - my understanding of the llvm-history is hazy at best, but AFAICT the "-project" suffix is not necessary anymore, now that all the subprojects have been absorbed in the monorepo for a while.
>>  
>> Best regards
>> H.
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>