[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues
Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Fri Jan 31 09:59:39 PST 2020
On 01/31/2020 01:21 AM, James Henderson wrote:
> My only concern is the ability to get auto-subscribed onto issues for specific tools (i.e. the setup I currently have). If that can be resolved in a satisfactory manner, then I'm all for this (although less than two weeks seems like a rather ambitious time to switch over...). If it can't, then I'd be opposed to switching at all.
>
Would you be able to help me test some potential solutions for this?
-Tom
> On Thu, 30 Jan 2020 at 19:07, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
>
> On 01/30/2020 10:48 AM, Mehdi AMINI wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 10:21 AM Tom Stellard via cfe-dev <cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto: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.
> >
> >
> > Do we have a way for individuals to get individually automatically subscribed on all the bugs created for a given tag?
> > Mailing-lists seem fairly rigid in terms of granularity with respect to tags.
> >
>
> When I said cc lists, I really meant auto-subscribe lists, I didn't mean
> that we would start sending issue emails to mailing lists.
>
> From what I can tell, there are a couple different ways to auto-subscribe
> people using github actions. I think the most simple would be to use
> the assignee field, but I think it's also possible by @ mentioning people
> directly in a comment or @ mentioning teams.
>
> I was planning to experiment more with this over the next few days.
>
> -Tom
>
>
>
>
>
> > --
> > Mehdi
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > What does everyone think about this?
> >
> > -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> <http://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> <mailto:llvm-bugs at llvm.org <mailto:llvm-bugs at llvm.org>> <mailto:llvm-bugs at llvm.org <mailto:llvm-bugs at llvm.org> <mailto: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 <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto: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 <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list