pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Bug/Issue tracker

To: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [pcp] Bug/Issue tracker
From: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 06:35:31 +1000
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20150420174712.GH18943@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20150420174712.GH18943@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
On 21/04/15 03:47, Michele Baldessari wrote:
Hi all,

we currently have issues/enhancements filed in three different places:
1. SGI Bugzilla (92 bugs open atm)
2. Github Issue Tracker (9 issues open atm)
3. Red Hat Bugzilla (mainly for issues with packaging in RHEL/Fedora or
    any Red Hat specific process - I am excluding this one from the
    proposal below)

...

My thoughts on this are ...

- I don't like multiple issue tracking repositories
- the current github spate seems to have been triggered by the Netflix Vector announcement, and I wonder if it will continue - since many of the github "issues" seem to be really, in the "this does not work for me" or "this does not seem right" categories, I would suggest we actively engage with the github posters to answer their questions and (a) close the issue, or (b) when it raises a real problem move the issue to one of the bugzilla repositories and then close the issue on github

This would turn the github "issues" into more of a forum, and leave the hard core issue tracking as it is today ... split in TWO places, sigh.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>