> On 04/20/2020 04:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote: > > In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the > > bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" repository in > > github. This has a few benefits: > > 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process > > run again, until we get a result we like. > > 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled. > > Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual issues > > can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will redirect from the > > movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug. > This seems like a good approach to me. This might work, yes.
There are some limitations as well, this is why I'm very cautious here. See https://docs.google.com/document/d/1byEcbsxF3pL-HGGd_K6axdh87tbcsuJK3Dp6ThxGjKA/edit for some list. > > > We could also just have llvm.org/PR### <http://llvm.org/PR###> be the url > > only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file listing > > the mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the redirects. (GCC > > just did this recently for svn revision number redirections, > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html). > > > > Would we even need a mapping file for this if we are able to get bugzilla id N > to be archived to GitHub issue id N? > > -Tom > > > Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks. > > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev > > <llvm-...@lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev > > <llvm-...@lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla > > to Github. > > It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of > > the proposal > > and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October. > > > > == Here is the original proposal: > > > > http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html > > > > == What has changed: > > > > * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific > > issue > > labels. We have a proof of concept notification system using > > github actions > > that will be used for this. > > > > * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed. > > > > * We have the initial list of labels: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels > > > > == Remaining issue: > > > > * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus > > on, > > and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla. Here > > are some options > > that we have discussed: > > > > 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only. Bugs filed in > > bugzilla that are > > still active will be updated there until they are closed. This > > means that over > > time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as > > bugs are closed > > out. Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from > > bugzilla will be archived > > into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the > > llvm-project repo. > > > > 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow > > anyone to > > manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in > > the llvm-project > > repo. The intention with this script is that it would be used to > > migrate high-traffic > > or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the > > visibility of the bug. > > This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs. > > > > 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable > > GitHub issues at the same time. > > Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub > > repository, and active bugs > > would be migrated to the llvm-project repo. > > > > > > Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There > > are lots of references to "PRxxxxx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and > > elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRxxxxx > > <http://llvm.org/PRxxxxx>, and if we can preserve all the issue numbers > > this would ease the transition pain substantially. > > > > > > The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be > > archived from bugzilla > > to GitHub. Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) > > means that we can migrate > > to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to > > archive bugs during the > > transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while > > (likely several months) > > while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from > > bugzilla to GitHub. > > > > > > The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some > > concerns raised on the list > > that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period > > of time would > > be very inconvenient. So, I would like to restart this discussion > > and hopefully we can > > come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward. > > > > Thanks, > > Tom > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-...@lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > llvm-...@lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> > > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-...@lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev -- With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
