[llvm-dev] IMPORTANT: LLVM Bugzilla migration

Tue Nov 23 06:56:43 PST 2021

Is there a link to the list of email-to-github-username mappings?  That would allow people to (a) verify their data was captured, and (b) check for typos.

Some of my colleagues really cannot remember whether they filled out the form to associate email addresses with github usernames.  I remember when we did the github migration it was just a file to edit and it was trivial to check.  With no confirmation email sent from the form, and no link to the data, all I can do is say, submit it again just in case.

As for myself, I vaguely remember doing it, probably because I had to do it 3 times for different addresses, but it was a *long* time ago.
--paulr

From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of James Henderson via llvm-dev
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2021 3:51 AM
To: Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmail.com>
Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] IMPORTANT: LLVM Bugzilla migration

I've got zero issues with the principle of moving to GitHub issues at all. I'm a little concerned by the process here though. Infrastructure projects should be treated just the same as code - it should be open to reviews and consensus driven. Details such as "when" are certainly within the scope of this process, and basically refusing to address concerns that members of the community have asked is no better for infrastructure than it is for a code review.

James

On Tue, 23 Nov 2021 at 07:31, Mehdi AMINI via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 3:45 PM James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

On Mon, Nov 22, 2021 at 3:36 PM Anton Korobeynikov <anton at korobeynikov.info<mailto:anton at korobeynikov.info>> wrote:
> If we can attribute it to an anonymous entity, e.g. by putting "Anonymous LLVM Contributor 123 wrote:" at the top of a comment by llvmbot, at least readers can understand whether two comments on a bug are from the same person or from different people, for example. Can we at least do something like that?
We do this for issues. They are marked as submitted by "LLVM Bugzilla
Contributor".

As I said, the purpose would be to allow disambiguating multiple anonymous contributors, e.g. by suffixing a unique number to each anonymous contributor. The reply misses that point.

> And, if such a problem exists, I think we ought to address that problem before migration.
They had more than half a year to submit a survey and received
multiple notifications. We are not going to delay the migration due to
this.

My understanding from what you said is that you have sent a single notification to each user back in April. (Plus a mailing list post, before that, in March.) If that is enough to capture most active users, great! But it sounds like it was not. You can't blame the users if a large percentage of them have a problem. That points to a problem in the process, not the people.

> Some other questions that pop into my mind:
Great! Thanks for the questions. Probably they should have asked 2
years ago. You will be able to check the results by yourself after the
migration.

It feels to me like you're being intentionally disingenuous here, and that makes me sad. My questions are about the migration plan/process/decisions as it is now finally implemented, not the initial ideas for migration from 2019. I don't think that a request that the final plan be written down and reviewable by others is out-of-line or unexpected.

Until very recently, it seemed like wasn't even clear that a migration would be feasible under the proposed scheme at all, and that the tooling was still under active development. Now that it's clear that it can be done (which is great news!), the next step I expected was a detailed writeup of the final characteristics of the implementation, and what things are expected to look like afterwards. Instead, at basically the first point where it's known that this is actually feasible, it's too late to ask any questions? There's no documentation of what's been implemented? No description even of what users should expect after migration? I do not understand this.

+1 with every James said, in particular this last paragraph.

It is amazing that this project finally looks close to completion, but as far as I can tell (and I'm following the iwg@ mailing list as well by the way) there hasn't been a single mockup or test instance that has been shared with the community so that we can have an idea of what does it look like.
There has been very little communication or documentation on this in 2021 as far as I can tell. We just had the LLVM dev meeting last week, this was a perfect opportunity for a demo of the proposed end result and a round table. In comparison, the previous big migrations (SVN to GitHub) went through multiple stages of prototype and demos that were openly shared with the community.

Can we get this demo done and have a proper review of the state of the post-migration? (before any migration happens obviously)

Thanks,

--
Mehdi

Certainly it's possible for a project to turn out successfully without a written design, documentation, or review. But isn't that unnecessarily risky?
_______________________________________________
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<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!pBC5hvEn5LuFM3tafH6bdCjk4-6osHAF-Hnznwf4XgG-x91RSS5vj60RQPvh0oOGoA$>
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!pBC5hvEn5LuFM3tafH6bdCjk4-6osHAF-Hnznwf4XgG-x91RSS5vj60RQPvh0oOGoA$>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20211123/8620e30b/attachment-0001.html>