Re: Switch from gnats to Bugzilla?

[Elena Zannoni <ezannoni@redhat.com>]

Silly question: would we migrate the existing gnats bug reports to bugzilla?

Elena


Christopher Faylor writes:
 > On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 10:56:44PM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
 > >>On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 11:20:13PM -0500, Christopher Faylor wrote:
 > >>
 > >>>It looks like our gcc counterparts are migrating to Bugzilla.
 > >>>
 > >>>I was wondering if it would be a good time to switch gdb to Bugzilla,
 > >>>too.
 > >>>
 > >>>IMO, Bugzilla is superior to GNATS.  The interface is more intuitive
 > >>>and it can even be linked to CVS (I believe).
 > >>>
 > >>>There is a long discussion of this subject here:
 > >
 > >Long was an understatement :-)
 > >
 > >>>http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2002-02/msg00454.html
 > >>>
 > >>>I'm willing to do the work if there is agreement that it is a good
 > >>>thing.
 > >>
 > >>
 > >>FWIW, I agree completely.
 > >
 > >To do the political side step.  I'd suggest waiting until there is a 
 > >firm decision from the GCC steering committe on a go/no-go.  If GCC 
 > >decide to change, I can't see any reason for GDB to not follow. 
 > >However, I've enough other headaches without trying to be the one 
 > >blazing this particular trail.
 > >
 > >Web-wize, yes I agree that bugzilla is better (I've too much experience 
 > >filing mozilla bugs :-).  I think the comment about web interface 
 > >performance is bogus.  I should know, I lived behind a 28k modem with 
 > >>500ms latency and survived :-)
 > >
 > >E-mail wize, the GCC thread suggests the people on the list understand 
 > >the issues - need to be able to submit, reply and see updates via 
 > >e-mail.  It isn't reasonable to assume that everyone has permenant IP 
 > >connectivity and <100ms latency.
 > 
 > That's fine with me.  I've volunteered to help with this anyway, so I
 > figured it wouldn't be that much harder to set this up for both gdb and
 > gcc if/when the time comes.
 > 
 > If the consensus was that Bugzilla wasn't a good solution for gdb, though,
 > I'd only have to do one...
 > 
 > cgf