On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > On Jan 7, 2008 2:11 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Benefits: > > > > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions > > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other > > upstream bug trackers > > - able to wipe out old bugs > > RH bugzilla needs to do all these things too, even if RHEL Engineering > doesn't realize it yet. I'd suggest that convincing RH of this, > instead of just breaking away, is one of those ways that Fedora can > help ensure (or ideally increase) RH's continued investment in Fedora. I'm not sure they don't realize it, but as always the limited number of cycles prevails. > > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > > doesn't need > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > this. Would these solutions be limited to a "read-only" scope? > > Demerits: > > > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > > - would need to run our own instance > > - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development > and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage > that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in > RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting > off your nose to spite your face. +1. Is it just me, or does the scariness of moving the build systems, etc., outside the wall seem now so much less in comparison? Scary = hard_work + deepthought is OK, but scary = unknown_pitfalls ... not so much. > > - would wipe out old bugs > > Wiping out old bugs is a good thing; on balance, unless you have > *bazillions* of testers, most old bugs cost more time to regularly > test/recheck/update/etc. than they are worth. True, but of course this should be concomitant with necessary steps to keep their reporters interested and engaged in Fedora wherever possible. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
