Re: RHEL moving to issues.redhat.com only long term

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Adam,

Adam Williamson <adamwill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> snip

> That could obviously have pretty significant consequences for Fedora.
> Bugzilla isn't only an issue tracker for Fedora; we run some
> significant processes through it, notably the Change process, the
> blocker/FE bug process, and the prioritized bug process. In A World
> Without Bugzilla all of those would need adapting (and their
> documentation updating). There's fairly tight integration between Bodhi
> and Bugzilla, which would need to be redesigned. Those are just things
> I can think of off the top of my head. There are also a couple of
> decades worth of internet links to Fedora issues on RH Bugzilla, of
> course.
>
> I guess the two big choices for Fedora if RH said "we're not
> maintaining Bugzilla any more" would be 1) take over maintaining
> Bugzilla or 2) switch to something else. 1) would probably be the path
> of least resistance, I guess.

Short term it is the path of the least resistance, but at least what
I've heard from $dayjob, maintaining a Bugzilla instance is no easy
task, as they are often customized (via non-upstream patches) and this
all needs to be maintained. I cannot speak for our infra team, but I
really don't know if they'd like yet another huge service, because this
effectively means they'd have to take over maintenance of
bugzilla.redhat.com...

>
> This does also kinda lead to a larger question for me, trying to wear
> both Red Hat and Fedora hats at the same time[0]. I wonder if we're
> kind of lacking a...mechanism, for want of a better word, to handle the
> *generic* case here. Let's rewind to Ye Olde Days, when "the Fedora
> project" first started. At that point Fedora and Red Hat shared a lot
> of tooling and infrastructure, and this was useful to both sides in
> many ways; it saves on development costs and it makes it easy for
> people to work in both worlds. With my Red Hat on, I think I'm allowed
> to say that internally we often talk about this being desirable -
> having consistency between how X is done in Fedora and how it's done
> for RHEL - and it obviously has benefits to Fedora too (it means we
> don't have to find the resources to do that same work at Fedora level).
>
> However, situations like this make me wonder if we might have an issue
> with keeping shared infra/tooling where it's desirable. It seems like
> this is a decision/conversation that's been happening within RH, about
> what makes sense for RH in terms of RHEL development. AFAIK this is the
> first time it's been formally talked about in a Fedora context, and the
> messaging is "RH has already decided to stop using Bugzilla for RHEL
> after 9". In other words, RH has decided on its own to move away from
> something that is part of the shared RH/Fedora "heritage way of doing
> things".
>
> I'm not saying that's wrong, but as I said it does make me wonder
> whether, if both sides do find shared tooling/approaches beneficial, we
> might want to approach this kind of potential change differently in
> future. Otherwise it does seem like we could sort of gradually drift
> apart, with no explicit intention to do so, and lose the benefits of
> shared tooling and process. Unless the ultimate outcome of this is
> "Fedora adopts issues.redhat.com for bug tracking" - which would be a
> possibility, but doesn't seem like a certainty - the result will be
> that we go from having a shared bug tracker, with the benefits of
> shared maintenance and being able to easily clone or reference bugs
> between Fedora and RHEL, to each maintaining our own bug tracker and
> not having those benefits.
>
> Of course, there would be sensitivities in developing such a process -
> it could look a lot like Red Hat telling Fedora how to do stuff, which
> I think isn't exactly the relationship we want to have. But at the same
> time I'm not sure "Red Hat or Fedora just deciding unilaterally to stop
> using this thing they'd previously both used" is always the best choice
> either.

No, certainly not. I think it would have been nice if the tooling
discussion happened before RH decided to drop Bugzilla so that we can
all use a common tooling. However, I also know that in a business
sometimes reaching such a consensus is everything but easy. It would
have been nice if someone at least tried though.


Cheers,

Dan
_______________________________________________
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora QA]     [Fedora Triage]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Apps]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Maemo Users]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux