From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 858 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2002 04:25:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 781 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2002 04:25:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO cygnus.com) (205.180.230.5) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Feb 2002 04:25:41 -0000 Received: from localhost.redhat.com (cse.cygnus.com [205.180.230.236]) by runyon.cygnus.com (8.8.7-cygnus/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA13018; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:25:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by localhost.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 469) id B78A6112E3; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 23:25:04 -0500 (EST) From: Elena Zannoni MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <15472.33312.499061.880569@localhost.redhat.com> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:25:00 -0000 To: Christopher Faylor Cc: Andrew Cagney , Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Switch from gnats to Bugzilla? In-Reply-To: <20020218040441.GA9286@redhat.com> References: <20020210042013.GA4884@redhat.com> <20020209234652.A9148@nevyn.them.org> <3C707B7C.9040902@cygnus.com> <20020218040441.GA9286@redhat.com> X-Mailer: VM 7.00 under Emacs 20.7.1 X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00226.txt.bz2 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