From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23061 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2002 04:19:24 -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 22984 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2002 04:19:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lacrosse.corp.redhat.com) (66.187.233.200) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 18 Feb 2002 04:19:20 -0000 Received: from cgf.cipe.redhat.com (cgf.cipe.redhat.com [10.0.1.172]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.9.3) with ESMTP id g1I4JHH21309; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 23:19:18 -0500 Received: (from cgf@localhost) by cgf.cipe.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.8.7) id g1I44fQ09459; Sun, 17 Feb 2002 23:04:41 -0500 Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:19:00 -0000 From: Christopher Faylor To: Andrew Cagney Cc: Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: Switch from gnats to Bugzilla? Message-ID: <20020218040441.GA9286@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Cagney , Daniel Jacobowitz , gdb@sources.redhat.com References: <20020210042013.GA4884@redhat.com> <20020209234652.A9148@nevyn.them.org> <3C707B7C.9040902@cygnus.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3C707B7C.9040902@cygnus.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00225.txt.bz2 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