This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Status of Bugzilla?
- From: Daniel Berlin <dan at dberlin dot org>
- To: Bryce McKinlay <bryce at waitaki dot otago dot ac dot nz>
- Cc: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>, Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc at mediaone dot net>, <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 23:47:06 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: Status of Bugzilla?
On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, Bryce McKinlay wrote:
> Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> >>gccbug email isn't actually as important as you'd think.
> >>It only accounts for 20% of bug reports.
> >>By percentage, in fact, it's been going down steadily.
> >Then too many people are failing to read or follow the documentation about
> >bug reporting (unless the use of pre-3.0 versions without gccbug is going
> >*up*, which would be very odd).
> I think most people are much more comfortable with entering bug reports
> via a web interface than with something like gccbug (not that I doubt
> gccbug is useful for some).
> Anyway, my vote is for the "Oh man, please" category. I would love to
> see bugzilla up and running as soon as possible. I'm a sporadic user of
> GNATS but I could see myself making far better use of the database with
> If it is going to be run in parallel to GNATS for a trial period, it
> might be best to not import the old database into the new system while
> the old one is still "live". I can see headaches occuring if we end up
> having updates to the same bugs in two systems.
I've had the system running parallel for a while, though i haven't pushed
an update out in a few days, i'm working on it.