[llvm-dev] Proposal for an alternative bugtracking workflow

[James Y Knight via llvm-dev]

I don't think that'd be a good way to implement it issue tracking with
github.

If we want to switch to github issues, we can do so within a single
repository *and* provide a tailored user experience for different
sub-products, by using issue templates. Issue templates can automatically
add issues to an appropriate label, assign to a default assignee, and
provide default text for users to fill in.

E.g., reusing "llvm-git-prototype" repository for testing, I've created an
test issue template for clangd. Click "New Issue" here, <
https://github.com/llvm-git-prototype/llvm/issues>. Documentation for
clangd could link directly to the clangd bug template, avoiding even the
"select a template" screen.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 5:37 AM Ilya Biryukov via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20190114/d61c1883/attachment.html>