[teampractices] Bugzilla migration Re: Project management tools review: Regressions/tradeoffs; migration

[Rob Lanphier]

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Quim Gil <qgil at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> If we end up going for Phabricator... it looks like the main bottleneck is
> the migration from Bugzilla (based on casual conversations with Andre and
> Chad).
>
> Going for Phabricator while keeping Bugzilla would be a half-backed
> solution that would perpetuate the divide/duplication that we are seeing
> now in some projects ("You can track this issue at...")
>
> Our Day 1 with Phabricator must include already the +60k tickets, and URL
> must be redirected automatically (Bug #1 == Task #1), otherwise it will be
> a mess.
>


Clearly, if we settle on Phabricator, a big part of the value will be the
integration of project management, issue tracking, and code management.
 That said, I think there are reasonable strategies for doing this in a
phased approach which doesn't involve blocking everything on a
Bugzilla->Phabricator migration.

Chad points out that we can start a fresh instance of Phabricator with
T100000, which would give us plenty of headway to import Bugzilla tickets 1
through 67000 or so at a later date.  Given how complicated a
Bugzilla->Phabrcator migration will be, I would much prefer a strategy that
doesn't insist on making that move on day one.

Rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20140326/30d1ef4d/attachment.html>