[oe] OE Bugzilla Future

[Koen Kooi]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 21-03-11 03:14, Tom Rini wrote:
> On 03/18/2011 12:57 AM, Frans Meulenbroeks wrote:
>> 2011/3/17 Richard Purdie<richard.purdie at linuxfoundation.org>:
>>> On Thu, 2011-03-17 at 19:10 +0100, Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
>>>> I'm in favor of keeping it, cleaning it up, and improve
>>>> the integration with patchwork / git. Throwing it away
>>>> would be a very bad sign to all those countless people
>>>> who've gone through the pains of actually working with
>>>> the bugtracker.
>>>
>>> The simple question is who is actually going to sort out the mess its
>>> in?
>>>
>>> Who is going to look after it on a continuing basis?
>>>
>>> If there isn't ownership, nothing is going to change.
>>
>> Actually I feel the real problem is that:
>> - people did not want to get bugs assigned to them (at least that was
>> what someone told me in the past)
>> - we're lacking a good notion of package or recipe ownership, so even
>> if we had someone acting as a bug manager, (s)he would have a hard
>> time to find out who to assign an issue to.
>>
>> and of course it takes discipline to look at regular intervals in the
>> bug tracker to see if there are issues that affect the recipes you
>> feel responsible for.
>> A discipline that few people have and that is also easy to forget if
>> there is only very rarely something for you.
>>
>> So it is more of a process issue.
>> (btw this may be something that could be picked up by the TSC).
> 
> The feeling of the TSC thus far has been "where are the active
> volunteers to use BTS (bugzilla, whatever)".  This far in the thread I
> count one.

I count none, actually, since you said 'active volunteers'.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFNhwsIMkyGM64RGpERApNUAJ9V86nRpwP8mTNW9b48FdaTjrTBMgCfXteG
GzEx7YQ0Mpuw1Yq1A2ZH6ao=
=UJ6A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----