[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]
Richard Smith via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Apr 20 12:49:35 PDT 2020
On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to
> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the
> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
> == Here is the original proposal:
> == What has changed:
> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
> labels. We have a proof of concept notification system using github
> that will be used for this.
> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
> * We have the initial list of labels:
> == Remaining issue:
> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla. Here are some
> that we have discussed:
> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only. Bugs filed in bugzilla that
> still active will be updated there until they are closed. This means that
> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs
> are closed
> out. Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla will
> be archived
> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project
> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone to
> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the
> repo. The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate
> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility
> of the bug.
> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub
> issues at the same time.
> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
> repository, and active bugs
> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are
lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere
in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx, and if we can preserve
all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain substantially.
> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
> archived from bugzilla
> to GitHub. Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that
> we can migrate
> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive bugs
> during the
> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely
> several months)
> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to
> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns
> raised on the list
> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time
> be very inconvenient. So, I would like to restart this discussion and
> hopefully we can
> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-dev