[llvm-dev] Update on Bugzilla migration

Fri Nov 12 11:53:51 PST 2021

I was about to suggest the same thing as Mara (email came in just as I was
about to hit send 🙂). It should be pretty easy to do this:

1) For each bugzilla bug number, create a GitHub issue with a name like
"placeholder for bugzilla migration" and a link to the corresponding
bugzilla bug (and maybe some explanation of what's going on so it's less
weird to people coming across it)
2) To avoid these issues clogging up the GitHub, close them all to start
with (they can be reopened later if they correspond to an open issue on
bugzilla)
3) Stop new issue creation on Bugzilla
4) Add GitHub issues in the same way as (1) for any new Bugzilla bugs that
were filed between (1) and (3). Technically you could start by stopping new
issue creation on Bugzilla, but it's probably nice to minimize the window
where there's no way to file issues.
5. Open up the GitHub for new issue creation
6. Figure out how to migrate all the Bugzilla bugs without time pressure

On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 11:48 AM Mara Sophie Grosch via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Maybe we can close bugzilla bug creation, create placeholder issues for
> the existing bugzilla bugs, create new bugs on GitHub and fill those
> placeholders asynchronously?
>
> Best, Mara
>
> Am 12. November 2021 19:45:11 UTC schrieb Philip Reames via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>:
>>
>>
>> On 11/12/21 11:36 AM, Mehdi AMINI wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 11:15 AM Philip Reames via llvm-dev <
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I've raised this point once before, but I think it's time to raise it
>>> again.
>>>
>>> I believe we should drop the goal of keeping bug numbers in sync between
>>> github and the legacy llvm bug database.  We do need a one-to-one
>>> mapping, but the numbers can be distinct.  This requires a bit of extra
>>>  ugliness in terms of needing to add a comment to every bug (both copies)
>>> with a link to the other, but this is a minimal badness, and stops
>>> mattering fairly quickly after the transition
>>>
>>
>> It is even better than this: if we can generate a map of old IDs to new
>> IDs when doing the conversion, it really isn't difficult to keep the
>> existing URL working (redirecting to the right migrated GitHub issue).
>>
>> I may be missing something about other advantages of mapping 1-1?
>>
>>
>>> Continuing to hold back the transition of new bugs to github is causing
>>> real immediate harm.  I strongly believe we are better off moving now
>>> with an imperfect system than waiting any longer.
>>>
>>
>> Is the ID mapping really the only issue keeping us back though?
>>
>> It seems to be a major one.  If nothing else, without it we could migrate
>> a subset of bugs which happen to migrate cleanly, and then come back and
>> handle the ones with issues at a arbitrarily later point.  Or we could
>> simply close creation of *new* bugzilla bugs, and start all new traffic on
>> github without waiting for a migration at all.  The whole reason we're not
>> doing that (seems to be) is that we want to preserve the low bug numbers
>> for 1-to-1 correspondence purposes.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mehdi
>>
>>
>>
>>> Philip
>>>
>>> On 11/1/21 9:13 AM, Anton Korobeynikov via llvm-dev wrote:
>>> > Dear All,
>>> >
>>> > Over the weekend we tried to perform a "dry-run" migration –
>>> > conversion of all 51k+ bugzilla issues to a temporary GitHub project.
>>> >
>>> > Unfortunately, the migration failed due to some obscure error at the
>>> > GitHub side. So far, GitHub is unable to tell us what the problem is,
>>> > how to solve / workaround it and how to proceed with the migration
>>> > (not to say, how to prevent similar issues during the real migration).
>>> > So far this is the real show-stopper.
>>> >
>>> > We will continue pushing, however, I do not have any ETA on when we
>>> > will be able to continue with the bugzilla migration.
>>> >
>>> > I'm sorry to disappoint you, but sometimes things are beyond my
>>> control.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 1:23 AM Anton Korobeynikov
>>> > <anton at korobeynikov.info> wrote:
>>> >> Dear Fellow LLVMers,
>>> >>
>>> >> I believe we were able to work-around the majority of GitHub
>>> >> deficiencies (at least those that were show-stoppers). We are checking
>>> >> the results. Hopefully I will be able to return to you with the final
>>> >> migration roadmap soon.
>>> >>
>>> >> Stay tuned!
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> On behalf of the LLVM Foundation,
>>> >> Anton Korobeynikov
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
>>> > Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>>
>> --
> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://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/20211112/0134602b/attachment-0001.html>