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

Thu Jan 30 10:34:17 PST 2020

My concern about switching is that I will now need to use two issue
trackers instead of one when doing things like searching for related bugs.

~Aaron

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020, 1:31 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com> wrote:

> On 01/30/2020 10:24 AM, Aaron Ballman wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 1:21 PM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev
> > <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/24/2019 07:54 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev wrote:
> >>> We held a round-table at the llvm dev conference about what other
> pieces of Github infrastructure we may want to use. This thread in
> particular is about switching to github issue tracking. Use of other parts
> of Github functionality was also discussed -- but that should be for other
> email threads.
> >>>
> >>> Most of the ideas here were from other people. I /believe/ this
> proposal represents the overall feeling of the folks at the round-table, in
> spirit if not in exact details, but nobody else has reviewed this text, so
> I can't make any specific such claim as to who the "we" represents, other
> than myself. Just assume all the good ideas here were from others, and all
> the bad parts I misremembered or invented.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I want to restart this discussion.  There seemed to be support for this,
> >> but we got held up trying to decide on the appropriate set of tags to
> >> use to classify issues.
> >>
> >> I propose that we move forward with this proposal and disable creation
> of
> >> new bugs in bugzilla on Feb 11, and require all new bugs be filed via
> GitHub
> >> issues from that date forward.
> >>
> >> I think that for choosing the tags to use, we should just take requests
> >> from the community over the next week and add whatever is asked for.
> The main
> >> purpose of adding tags is so we can setup cc lists for bugs, so I think
> this
> >> is a good way to ensure that we have tags people care about.  We can
> always
> >> add more tags later if necessary.
> >>
> >> What does everyone think about this?
> >
> > What did we decide to do with all the existing issues in Bugzilla?
> >
>
> This is undecided.  The first step of this  proposal only affects new
> issues.
> Existing issues will remain in bugzilla and will be updated there too.  At
> some point in the future bugzilla will become read-only and/or the issues
> will
> be migrated somewhere else, but no decision has been made about how to do
> that yet.
>
> -Tom
>
> > ~Aaron
> >
> >>
> >> -Tom
> >>
> >>
> >>> Background
> >>> ----
> >>> Our bugzilla installation is...not great. It's been not-great for a
> long time now.
> >>>
> >>> Last year, I argued against switching to github issues. I was somewhat
> optimistic that it was possible to improve our bugzilla in some incremental
> ways...but we haven't. Additionally, the upstream bugzilla project was
> supposed to make a new release of bugzilla ("harmony"), based on
> bugzilla.mozilla.org <http://bugzilla.mozilla.org>'s fork, which is much
> nicer. I thought we would be able to upgrade to that. But there has been no
> such release, and not much apparent progress towards such. I can't say with
> any confidence that there will ever be. I no longer believe it really makes
> sense to continue using bugzilla.
> >>>
> >>> This year, we again discussed switching. This time, nobody really
> spoke up in opposition. So, this time, instead of debating /whether/ we
> should switch, we discussed /how/ we should switch. And came up with a plan
> to switch quickly.
> >>>
> >>> GitHub issues may not be perfect, but I see other similarly-large
> projects using it quite successfully (e.g. rust-lang/rust) -- so I believe
> it should be good for us, as well. Importantly, Github Issues is
> significantly less user-hostile than our bugzilla is, for new contributors
> and downstream developers who just want to tell us about bugs!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Proposal
> >>> ----
> >>> We propose to enable Github issues for the llvm-project repository in
> approximately two weeks from now, and instruct everyone to start filing new
> issues there, rather than in bugzilla.
> >>>
> >>> Some things we'd like to get in place before turning on Github's Issue
> tracker:
> >>> 1. Updated documentation.
> >>> 2. An initial set of issue tags we'd like to use for
> triaging/categorizing issues.
> >>> 3. Maybe setup an initial issue template. Or maybe multiple templates.
> Or maybe not.
> >>>
> >>> But more important are the things we do /not/ want to make
> prerequisites for turning on Github issues:
> >>>
> >>> We do /not/ yet plan to turn off Bugzilla, and do /not/ plan to
> migrate the existing issues to GitHub as a prerequisite for switching. We
> will thus expect that people continue using bugzilla for commenting on the
> existing bugs -- for the moment.
> >>>
> >>> We do /not/ want to build supplementary notification systems to make
> github issues send additional emails that it is unable to send itself. We
> will only support what GitHub supports. That means:
> >>> - You can subscribe to notification emails for activity in the entire
> llvm-project repository.
> >>> - You can subscribe to notification emails on an individual issue.
> >>> - Someone else can CC you on an individual issue to get your
> attention, and you will get notifications from that (unless you opt-out).
> >>> - No emails will be sent to llvm-bugs at llvm.org <mailto:
> llvm-bugs at llvm.org> for github issues.
> >>> - There is no builtin way for users to subscribe to emails for bugs
> that have a given label (for example, all "clang" issues, or all x86
> issues).
> >>>
> >>> Further steps
> >>> ----
> >>> After we migrate, there's still things we want to do:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Discuss and setup new and better procedures around bug triage and
> prioritization.
> >>>
> >>> What we have been doing up until now has not been great in any case.
> Switching bug-trackers is a great opportunity to try to do something
> better. E.g., like what the rust project has done (
> https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md#issue-triage,
> https://forge.rust-lang.org/release/triage-procedure.html#issue-triage).
> >>>
> >>> 2. Bug migration
> >>>
> >>> /After/ the initial switchover, we do want to investigate two
> possibilities for migrating issues and turning off the bugzilla server. I
> expect which one is chosen will come down mostly to feasibility of
> implementation.
> >>>
> >>> Possibility 1: Migrate /all/ the existing bugs into a secondary
> "llvm-bugs-archive" github repository, and then turn off bugzilla. Github
> offers the ability to move bugs from one repository to another, and so we
> can use this to move bugs that are still relevant afterwards (potentially
> this could be done automatically upon any activity). Then, shut down
> bugzilla, and leave behind only a redirect script.
> >>>
> >>> Possibility 2: Create the ability to import an individual bug from
> Bugzilla into the llvm-project repository by pressing a "migrate this bug
> to github" button. Then, leave bugzilla running only as a static snapshot
> -- as static as possible while leaving the "migrate this bug to github"
> button operational.
> >>>
> >>> In both cases, we'd want to support a redirect script to take you from
> the old bug ids to the migrated bug page. In both cases, we would
> /preserve/ the entire archive of existing bugs, but would not import the
> entire set into the "llvm-project" github repository.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> LLVM Developers mailing list
> >>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> cfe-dev mailing list
> >> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20200130/41ae1add/attachment-0001.html>