This is the mail archive of the
gdb@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: Switch from gnats to Bugzilla?
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