httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: Bugzilla action items
Date Sun, 17 Mar 2002 22:21:03 GMT
At 03:51 PM 3/17/2002, you wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 17, 2002 at 03:53:00PM -0500, Joshua Slive wrote:
> > +1 for separate projects based on the advice of the bugzilla-experienced
> > people.
>
>What should we call it then?  Apache httpd 2.0?  httpd 2.0?

Apache httpd-1.3
Apache httpd-2.0

are unambigously similar to their cvs repository names.  And those expecting
to find "Apache" won't be disappointed.  If you were going to pick that style,
that's what I'd pick, and as I suggested, I'm simply -0 on this approach over
an all-in-one model.  Looks like you have a solution that pleases everyone.

I can't argue with the fact that httpd-1.3 and httpd-2.0 have different lists
of components, which is a strong factor.

> > Well, I think we need every module in there, and a few other things like
> > "build", "configuration", "website", "apr", etc.
>
>Considering how easy it is to add components, I don't think this
>should be a big deal.  IMHO, one of the problems with GNATS is that
>very few people have access to change the components.  Hopefully,
>if we have enough admins flying around, we can keep this under control.

Sign me up, as often as not, I'm the one nagging RoUS for new ones.

>Notice that I also created an APR project.  We'd need to identify
>how we want to address APR bugs - should they be reported on that
>project or should they be reported under httpd for the apr
>component?

Both.  Create apr, apr-util and apr-iconv components of the APR project,
create the apr and apr-util components under the Apache httpd-2.0 and
Tomcat 4 projects [both of which rely on that component.

When the day comes you are looking for apr-util bugs to close, query
across all projects for the apr-util component.  You will hit the bugs that
all ASF projects are encountering with apr-util, including library users
[developers] filing bugs under APR -> apr-util.

> > +1.  Will changing the default "owner" for all the components to this
> > mailing list accomplish that?
>
>I think it might - I'm not a bugzilla expert by any stretch of the
>imagination.  I'd prefer that we created a new list (say bugs@httpd)
>rather than re-using apache-bugdb@apache.org.  -- justin

This is, for reasons Marc pointed out, the wrong solution.  Let's create
a bugs@httpd list, and set up bugzilla (whatever it takes to accomplish
this) to cc all Apache httpd bugs to that list.

This doesn't prevent us from also using module owners, so if someone
commits to handling a given class of bugs, they will be notified about
those bugs.  Consider Stipe who is extremely efficient with cygwin
reports, if he was able to subscribe to that single class of bugs, that
would help keep his bandwidth under control.  I have to believe that
more platform folks would sign on to bugs traffic if they could filter what
os or components they care about.

I think my 2c are spent, go at it, and I sure hope this our last trip
across the river :-)  In fairness, I believe the original attempt was
undermined more by the old security holes that any technical
incapacity to leverage bugzilla.

Bill


Mime
View raw message