Re: Planned changes for bugzilla.kernel.org to reduce the "Bugzilla blues"
From: Hans de Goede
Date: Wed Oct 05 2022 - 05:57:32 EST
On 10/5/22 11:00, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 04.10.22 22:25, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 04, 2022 at 10:06:28PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>>> Your plan would afaics mean that we invest further into a software
>>> abandoned by its upstream and already becoming more and more of a
>>> maintenance burden. That investment would also further increase our
>>> dependency on that software by establishing workflows that rely on it.
>>> Is that really wise at this point? Wouldn't it be better to spend that
>>> time and effort to build something better that is more future proof?
>> Unfortunately, there's no such thing. ;) And maybe we'll even help tip the
>> course of history into the other direction -- Red Hat uses bugzilla, and so
>> does OpenSuse, so there's a pretty good core of well-funded companies that
>> would be in a position to help keep bugzilla going if it's looking like the
>> platform is still alive. Or that could all be wishful thinking and they'll all
>> migrate to Jira or something equally horrible, who knows.
> Well, Red Hat apparently is already in the process of migrating to Jira
> in the long run:
> To quote that mail from March:
> As some of you may know, Red Hat has been using both Bugzilla and Jira
> via issues.redhat.com for RHEL development for several years. Our
> intention is to move to using issues.redhat.com only for the major
> RHEL releases after RHEL 9.
That is for RHEL only though I'm not sure what the plans for Fedora are.
Also I do believe that the Red Hat bugzilla team is working on porting
bugzilla to postgresql, which would at least fix the problem of depending on
a no longer maintained mysql version.
If the postgresql port is something of interest to keep bugzilla.kernel.org
going for now, then it is probably best to just directly contact the bugzilla