Bugzilla update and schedule for changeover

[Daniel Berlin]

With this out of the way, I *think* I can set a date for the switchover.

I have finals starting April 28th, and a term paper due around that 
time.
So it's either soon, or mid-may.
By soon, I mean in the next 2 weeks (The short time period is because 
i'm accounting for still being available for handling emergencies and 
bugfixing at a rapid rate if necessary for the period right after the 
final switch is thrown at the end.)
Assuming people don't want to wait, i'll propose the following:

Already, gcc-bugzilla is set up to be a followup mail handler, and 
sent-out bug changes have it as the reply address.

Any followup comments to a bug replied to should get bcc'd to 
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org automatically.
In fact, it would work right now, but gcc-bugs won't accept bcc.

Please be aware that at this point, the database will still be 
overwritten by the final conversion database, so please don't copy 
*only* gcc-bugzilla on followup comments to bugs (though feel free to 
cc it, it should be able to parse the <component>/<id> format and 
append comments to the right bug report).

Assuming this causes no major catastrophes, and everything is working 
okay (e-mail handlers and perl scripts are fickle things, put them 
together and it gives me the shivers), then at the end of this week 
(sunday), the incoming gnats bug reports will be copied (not simply 
redirected) to the scripts that process it, so that these bug reports 
will appear in Bugzilla.

This will cause people to get password mail if this is their first bug 
submission, so maybe something should be on the news page or (sent to 
gcc-announce) or something so it's not a complete surprise and cause 
for mass hysteria.

Assuming no problems, at the middle of next week (wednesday), i'll do 
the final gnats conversion, and we'll cut the gnats processing out of 
the mail aliases.
At this point, i'll update the user-facing web pages to say Bugzilla 
rather than GNATS everywhere, and the reporting instructions.

A little after that, i'll have a log_accum ready that handles bugzilla 
properly (I've actually got it done, but no real way to test it yet).

Yes, I'm aware this schedule is rather quick, but the email pieces are 
the only actual parts i worry about, and anything wrong with them will 
show up rather quickly. The rest has been running for ages, and is 
quite stable.

It's either this, or wait until at least the middle of may, when my 
finals are over (which would then allow a little more time in between 
each piece, but honestly, i don't think more than a week between each 
piece is necessary anyway).
I have absolutely no real preference here, so whatever people want is 
fine by me.

Chris (or any other admin), if you have a preference for when you might 
have to suddenly deal with something (though this is not likely, since 
it's all in the scripts), we should take this into account to, of 
course.

--Dan

On Monday, March 24, 2003, at 01:42  PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Mar 2003, Daniel Berlin wrote:
>
>> How is this then?
>>
>> I also changed <b> to <strong>, as requested by Gerald.
>
> I think the description of updating the email parsing script is needed 
> in
> both branching.html and releasing.html.  Otherwise it looks OK (as far 
> as
> the release management docs go - obviously all the other web pages
> mentioning GNATS will need updating (and gnatsweb PR links changed
> although the simple case of links to a PR should also get redirected
> smoothly), but the public linked to ones should get the update checked 
> in
> only when the changeover is done; the release management docs aren't
> linked to from the rest of the site).

>
> -- 
> Joseph S. Myers
> jsm28@cam.ac.uk
>