From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21973 invoked by alias); 7 May 2003 20:30:26 -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 21962 invoked from network); 7 May 2003 20:30:25 -0000 Message-ID: <3EB96CDB.5080405@eCosCentric.com> Date: Wed, 07 May 2003 20:30:00 -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: Re: Patch policy References: <1052225944.30126.4370.camel@hermes> <20030506132550.GK24032@biferten.ma.tech.ascom.ch> <3EB7CAAF.4050807@eCosCentric.com> In-Reply-To: <3EB7CAAF.4050807@eCosCentric.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2003-05/txt/msg00015.txt.bz2 Jonathan Larmour wrote: > > I'd suggest not using bugzilla actually. I've already been thinking > about this problem and there are well established patch managers out > there. In particular I'm thinking of what is on savannah.gnu.org, e.g.: > http://savannah.gnu.org/patch/?group=inetutils I was talking to Alex, and he has persuaded me now that bugzilla is a good solution after all! The problems I had with it were primarily due to there not being a good mapping between bug states and patch states. But it turns out that the Bugzilla folks have now thought of that. The primary way to sort this out is using flags, like: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/flag-help.html With flags, the mozilla folks sensibly use bugzilla for patch review. Alex also pointed out that with Bugzilla, it means that all patches are in one place - both patches that we say close bugs, and new patches. This means people looking for patches only need to search one place. The only thing is that we can't just add flags to bugzilla.redhat.com... so I suggest we go ahead and make a decision about moving to http://bugs.ecos.sourceware.org/ Does it look okay by everyone? If so, we can shut down the old bugzilla, move all the existing bugs over, and update the web pages to point to bugs.ecos.sourceware.org. Then once we're running with that and happy that it works, we can start looking at what's needed to get patches in there, primarily involving documenting patch submission procedure. One thing I'd still want cleared up is how we keep track of what's actually being checked in, i.e. when a patch would transition between "approved" and "committed" states. I don't know if Alex has any ideas on that. Jifl -- eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts --[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]-- --[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine