From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from esa2.mentor.iphmx.com (esa2.mentor.iphmx.com [68.232.141.98]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 617873856945 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:13:44 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 617873856945 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codesourcery.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mentor.com X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.93,355,1654588800"; d="scan'208";a="83939987" Received: from orw-gwy-01-in.mentorg.com ([192.94.38.165]) by esa2.mentor.iphmx.com with ESMTP; 29 Sep 2022 09:13:40 -0800 IronPort-SDR: qZ08qkRenfVv5VeHvg3xpAa7gmSfox4QL0p5PQQGjZ8KmrlRuUA3mlT4lDcxItFytLmK2H9q/l xE23uC3Ru6OrOvdtODXOX07eLAuRBS2i87wSk24QQU4YariJD4uaK6aP2BmcGx3xg7DJHi5J+E xYQ5qN8PUOHtZ8iVLZ/pME5hvdD1r6wcbEhY562ZoCwbYVUdjqDynDcddwKnI9+d7F8IazB20Q jySXJ3Bc8FV10auS13Q+3XkIPP7unS0tSzZ4Ux10F+eQF9FB9y02QgLDP241iwac4bpKNY2R7e EoY= Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 17:13:33 +0000 From: Joseph Myers X-X-Sender: jsm28@digraph.polyomino.org.uk To: Jonathan Corbet via Overseers CC: Carlos O'Donell , Jonathan Corbet Subject: Re: The GNU Toolchain Infrastructure Project In-Reply-To: <87v8p6i6ht.fsf@meer.lwn.net> Message-ID: References: <87v8p6i6ht.fsf@meer.lwn.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Originating-IP: [137.202.0.90] X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-11.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.11) To svr-ies-mbx-10.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.10) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3111.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,KAM_SHORT,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Thu, 29 Sep 2022, Jonathan Corbet via Overseers wrote: > Just for the record, it is still my feeling that the LF's infrastructure > management has been a good thing for the kernel community. Whether it > would be suitable for the toolchain community is not something I'm in a > position to have an opinion on. If anybody is curious about how > interactions with that group work, there is a current discussion on > bugzilla that might be interesting: > > https://lwn.net/ml/ksummit-discuss/05d149a0-e3de-8b09-ecc0-3ea73e080be3@leemhuis.info/ Regarding Bugzilla, also see the GTI TAC meeting (24 Aug 2022) recording at 23:37 to 25:44. It's not clear what good solutions are right now for free software issue tracking, taking into account considerations such as: * easy for anyone to submit and comment on bugs; * protection against spam bug and comment submission (which is in tension with easy bug submission; we have restricted account creation, with people needing to email overseers to create an account on sourceware Bugzilla at all, or to email gcc-bugzilla-account-request to create an account on GCC Bugzilla from a large number of common email domains in which spammers can easily create accounts); * configurability of the fields and values of those fields and other logic used in the bug tracker; * ability to get a local copy of the tracker data (this is an area where Bugzilla is weak; you can probably do something with the REST API, but it's not designed to make it easy for someone to keep a local copy of all the data up to date the way git is); * being an actively maintained project (that also being a concern for Bugzilla). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com