[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Status of Bugzilla Migration

[Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev]

On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 2:36 AM Anton Korobeynikov via cfe-dev
<cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> Some of you who are checking the migration notes
> (https://bit.ly/3HVjr7a) might already have noticed that we're stuck
> again. Let me provide more information about what is going on now and
> what the plans are.
>
> As a reminder, previously we imported all issues in the archive repo
> and essentially the very last step remained: migration to the live
> llvm-project repo. This step is crucial and one-way, once started we
> cannot undo the steps we'd made. We also have to rely on GitHub here
> as we cannot do it via rate-limited API calls
>
> During the final checks two issues were revealed:
>   - Notifications are still sent in some cases
>   - Migration sets the last modification date of the closed issues (it
> looks like it was implemented like "re-open issue, transfer and close
> again"). As a result, all closed issues essentially got sorted
> chronologically before the real open ones.
>
> These issues were fixed at GitHub side and we proceeded with
> re-checking everything. It turned out that another issue appeared: the
> labels were silently lost and the migrated issues were completely
> labelless, despite being annotated by 140+ labels we had originally.
> For now this is a show-stopper issue. The issue was reported and
> acknowledged by GitHub, however, not ETA was provided.
>
> Our current options are:
>   1. Abandon the migration
>   2. Wait until the issue is resolved on GitHub side
>   3. Try to find alternative solutions to workaround GitHub issue
>
> 2. is essentially not an option. I am proposing to abandon the
> migration and unlock the bugzilla if the solution will not be found by
> the end of this week.

Thank you for all of the hard work you've put into this so far, and
thank you for the detailed update on the unfortunate place we're at.

When you say "abandon the migration", do you mean temporarily or
permanently? I'd be strongly in favor of temporarily abandoning the
migration so that we can continue to do useful work against bugs while
we sort this out. If you're thinking of abandoning permanently, I
could be in support of that as well, but I'd want to know what our
aspirational goals are for the bug database long-term before giving my
support.

~Aaron

>
> The only alternative I'm seeing is to apply the labels post-migration.
> There are important downsides:
>   - This has to be done via GitHub API and we're rate limited to ~5000
> requests per hour, so this means that the labelling will take ~20
> hours. I was told that there is no way for us to have the API rate
> limit increased.
>   - This might trigger notifications. My quick check via web ui does
> not, but I cannot be 100% with anything here
>   - (the most important) This will screw the "last modified" timestamp
> as label setting is an event that is recorded in the issue. There is
> no way to set some "old" timestamp, it is assigned by GitHub
> automatically.
>
>  For now I'm testing the script for 3. and waiting for any news from GitHub.
>
> I will keep you updated.
>
> --
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> On behalf of LLVM Foundation
> _______________________________________________
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev