From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 18881 invoked by alias); 22 Apr 2003 23:26:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ecos-maintainers-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: ecos-maintainers-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 18874 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2003 23:26:55 -0000 Message-ID: <3EA5CFBD.5060204@jifvik.org> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 23:26:00 -0000 From: Jonathan Larmour User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-GB; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030314 X-Accept-Language: en-gb, en, en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: eCos Maintainers Cc: Alex Schuilenburg Subject: Bugzilla Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-04/txt/msg00049.txt.bz2 I don't know what anyone else's thoughts are yet, but I'm getting increasingly unhappy with the Red Hat bugzilla. I've been trying for _ages_ to try and get Dave Lawrence, the Red Hat bugzilla administrator to sort out what was happening with the ecos-bugs@sources.redhat.com list - I've never got it to work but I've never been able to work out why :-|. There were other issues I've mailed him about in the past and never got a response either. When I was in Red Hat, I talked to him and he's a very nice guy, but unfortunately he's also a complete black hole :-(. But that isn't all - much of the Red Hat bugzilla setup is completely inappropriate for eCos anyway. The only allowed OS is "Linux", not any other Unix never mind Windows*, the "Platforms" contain a massive list, much of which is irrelevant, and we don't have the ability to add new platforms without talking to.... you guessed it, Dave Lawrence. There's also the bug entry page at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/easy_enter_bug.cgi which has many assumptions that you're reporting against Red Hat Linux or a Red Hat Linux-based product. It's just needlessly confusing. Soooo... I think the best thing of all would be for us to have our own bugzilla. Now the GCC group has set up their bugzilla on s.r.c, but unfortunately they have highly customised it for their needs :-|. Even if we tried to share it, I suspect (like occasionally in the past happened with faq-o-matic) they'll break it for others simply because they don't think to test it for anyone else. And we can't have a completely separate instance as some of the stuff has to be common. So instead I've been talking with Alex and the thing is that eCosCentric is going to set up its own bugzilla _anyway_, so it would make a lot of sense for that to be exploited. Bugzilla also supports a sort of "virtual host" analogy that means that no-one should see any eCosCentric-isms at all, ever. We of course will be actively keeping it working for our own use anyway, so it should be reliable. This also has the advantage that we can import all the existing public eCos bugs from Red Hat's bugzilla (we don't want to lose the history obviously) but fix the assignments - many are owned by jlarmour@redhat.com or bartv@redhat.com etc. and that needs to be fixed since those addresses don't exist any more! Here's what it looks like now: http://bugzilla.ecoscentric.com/ but obviously it shouldn't be explicitly ecoscentric.com, so I suggest we get bugs.ecos.sourceware.org and/or later on bugs.ecos.gnu.org set up as aliases so no-one should know what machine it actually lives on. If you look at the "new bug" page you can see Alex has even added all the version numbers/platforms etc. so you can see what it looks like. This would solve a lot of issues with bugzilla and will allow us to customise it _exactly_ to our needs, so I'm very keen to do this. Has anyone else any other suggestions or should I just go ahead and see about getting bugs.ecos.sourceware.org sorted? Obviously the presentation can be changed to whatever we want, but that's just a detail. Jifl -- --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]-- --[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine