I don't like git, I don't like bugzilla, I don't like bugs ;) Anyway I strongly propose keeping things together. So we may use git/gerrit if necessay, we should use bugzilla and we should hold the documentation on _one_ place (now its mediawiki and that's the right place imho). Because people just know bugzilla as _the_ bug tracker for mediawiki (dependant) software unlike JIRA I guess. Unfortunately we haven't SUL account at bugzilla. I also oppose to split the bug tracker for trunk and rewrite branch.

Let's discuss the fields: The "product" is pywikibot, the "components" might be user scripts, some libraries. But what about the version? We need the python version, the trunk/rewrite information and the current running release which are shown by version.py. At sf we have 4 trackers. I guess we don't need the patch tracker, this is eighter a solution for a bug request or a feature request. support request could we follow and maintain at the corresponding manual: talkpage at mw.

regards xqt

----- Original Nachricht ---- Von: Lewis Cawte lewiscawte@googlemail.com An: Pywikipedia discussion list pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Datum: 10.06.2012 00:01 Betreff: Re: [Pywikipedia-l] Move to bugzilla

On 09/06/2012 22:56, Maarten Dammers wrote:

...

Hi Doug and Bináris,

Op 9-6-2012 18:31, Doug schreef:

...

I proposed this or Jira, which is used on toolserver, a few months back and got some resistance.

For me Jira is out because I think that will stop at some point.

...

I still support anything other than what we have but note that wikimedia is transitioning to git, which I believe has its own tracker.

Git doesn't have it's own tracker, you might be confused by Github (which does have it's own tracker) or you're mixing up Gerrit and Bugzilla. Gerrit is for the code review and doesn't replace bugzilla.

Op 9-6-2012 22:18, Bináris schreef:

...

Wait a moment. We were told that by the next year every project has to change to git and SVN repository will no longer work at WMM. Some of us are happy with SVN and we may have to move to an SVN-aware site. Do we want to move twice? It's not bad to have everything (bug tracker, source code, documentation) together, but beeing forced to git would perhaps a big price for that. :-)

I would strongly oppose moving the repository to an external site. I would aim at moving to GIT somewhere next year.

Agreed, I originally opposed this but I "saw the light" when I was in Berlin, its actually a lot simpler than it looks in my opinion... although I doubt I've really done anything advanced yet...

-- Lewis Cawte

---

Pywikipedia-l mailing list Pywikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikipedia-l