[Mageia-dev] Proposal for bugzilla

[Michael scherer]

On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 01:55:02PM +0100, Frederic Janssens wrote:
> On 2010-12-22, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 22 décembre 2010 à 00:32 +0100, Frederic Janssens a écrit :
> >> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 17:07, Michael Scherer <misc at zarb.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Le mardi 14 décembre 2010 à 17:05 +0100, Dexter Morgan a écrit :
> >> > > I would like to have your input to let us able to provide a bugzilla
> >> > > really soon
> >> >
> >> > So if I am not wrong, in bugzilla, we have :
> >> > - products
> >> > - component, contained in products
> >> > - and various field, per bug,
> >> >
> >> > and the way we organize everything will impact the layout.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Yes.
> >>
> >> In preparation of the future interaction (by xmlrpc) between the
> >> mageia-app-db site and the mageia bugzilla,  I have been testing
> >> http://bugs.mageia.org/ .
> >> Xmlrpc works, but it will be necessary to configure additional fields.
> >> The minimum would be to add an 'RPM Package' field (such as exists on
> >> https://qa.mandriva.com/).
> >
> > What about component not related to rpm ?
> 
> The 'RPM Package' field would be left blank.
> (usually many fields are left blank)

That's quite useless clutter in this case :/
 
> >
> > And do you mean srpm or rpm ?
> 
> On https://qa.mandriva.com/ anything goes.
> To permit consistent searches I think we should standardise.
> The aim would to be to as specific as needed but not more;
> as far as I know that would be :
> 
> name-version-release
> 
> unless the bug is architecture specific, where we would have :
> 
> name-version-release.architecture

There is already a "architecture" field, afaik, as well as a version field,
no ?

( I didn't check as I refuse to enter my password over a insecured http session ).

And I think that giving rpm ( and not srpm ) will make search a little bit complex
in some corner cases ( can will also cause problem for the next point ). 

> >
> > We should also take in account package naming change.
> 
> which change?

Well, when a rpm change name, rename it in the field to be the new name, so not all bugs 
are lost.

-- 
Michael Scherer