This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Status of Bugzilla?
- From: Joe Buck <jbuck at synopsys dot COM>
- To: rodrigc at mediaone dot net (Craig Rodrigues)
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 22:57:17 -0800 (PST)
- Subject: Re: Status of Bugzilla?
Craig Rodrigues, to Joseph Myers:
> Do you speak for the GCC Steering Committee regarding these
> requirements? If Daniel does not implement these features,
> will this block Bugzilla from being adopted by the
> GCC Project?
Joseph is not even a member. Just the same, the SC tries to operate
by consensus, taking respected developers' concerns into account.
If there is disagreement over something like this, then 3/4 of the SC
has to vote in favor of making a change (in this case, replacing
GNATS with Bugzilla) or the change is not made. I think that
almost everyone with any experience with both systems finds Bugzilla
to be superior. But if there are any issues it's best to hear about
> Well, that's you. I'd like to hear commentary from other
> users of the GCC GNATS system. I am perfectly comfortable using a
> Web-only interface for viewing problem reports.
I think we'll still need to be able to accept bug reports by email: I know
of a number of organizations that block their technical people off from
the Internet except for email (including a number of respected chip
designers and systems houses). The motivation seems to be a combination
of paranoia and desire to keep people focused. Just the same, if there
are only a few of those, we can handle entering them into the db in some
other way (if necessary, by getting volunteers to do it, if that's too
much, some way of translating an appropriately formatted email message
into an HTTP PUT operation that will look exactly like someone submitting
a form. I suspect that a bit of Perl and a modified gccbug would do that.
But for me, this is a nice-to-have, not a requirement. I much prefer web