On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 10:55 AM Michel Dänzer <mic...@daenzer.net> wrote:
> On 2018-11-30 4:57 p.m., Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2018 at 17:23, Dylan Baker <dy...@pnwbakers.com> wrote: > > > >> Personally speaking, I think that better next steps for gitlab > integration are: > >> - migrate from bugzilla to gitlab issues > > > > This is currently held up by a mutual death grip: both AMD and Intel > > want to be able to move or reassign issues between kernel / Mesa / X11 > > within Bugzilla, so have requested that nothing moves until everything > > moves. I don't know whether that has to be one big flag day or whether > > the driver teams would find it acceptable for all three components to > > have a documented plan with a timeline on it. Intel also have some > > pretty heavy scripting and tooling around Bugzilla which would need to > > be modified to track GitLab instead. > > > > From an infrastructure point of view though, Bugzilla is getting less > > and less acceptable to run as a service. > > Well, getting rid of Bugzilla entirely requires migrating all remaining > bugs somewhere else anyway. :) As long as kernel / Mesa / > xf86-video-amdgpu/ati bugs are all migrated to GitLab issues, that > should be fine from an AMD perspective FWIW. > The ability to cross-link and migrate to/from mesa has been somewhat useful for us. However, I don't know that it's really *that* useful when you can easily create a GitLab issue and give a link to BZ or copy the bug text or something. Also, given that GitLab doesn't really let you migrate issues (you can link them), I don't know that we're loosing much that we wouldn't loose anyway. I think we have far too much ado about a fairly small thing. --Jason
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
