From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24969 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2002 04:20:18 -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 24852 invoked from network); 10 Feb 2002 04:20:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com) (12.107.208.154) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 10 Feb 2002 04:20:15 -0000 Received: from cgf.cipe.redhat.com (dhcpd111.meridian.redhat.com [172.16.47.111]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g1A4KFI16009 for ; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 23:20:15 -0500 Received: (from cgf@localhost) by cgf.cipe.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.8.7) id g1A4KDm04971 for gdb@sources.redhat.com; Sat, 9 Feb 2002 23:20:13 -0500 Date: Sat, 09 Feb 2002 20:20:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Switch from gnats to Bugzilla? Message-ID: <20020210042013.GA4884@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: gdb@sources.redhat.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00168.txt.bz2 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: 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. cgf