Re: [Geary] GNOME moving to Gitlab... and Geary?

[Michael Gratton <mike vee net>]

On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 9:03 PM, step21 <step21 devtal de> wrote:
> If I remember correctly, the disagreements came also mostly because
> people have different workflows/value different things, were not sure
> about the capabilities of gitlab and/or regarding a migration, had
> very different requirements for what should be transferred. Overall
> the sentiment seemed very positive however, unless someone depends on
> that some search option in bugzilla that will probably never be
> exactly the same somewhere else.

Yeah, I think it's probably good move - getting closer integration 
between the bug tracker and the code repo should be really helpful for 
contributors, and having a more usable bug tracker UI should hopefully 
likewise reduce the barrier for reporting bugs.

> Regarding bugs, especially if unconfirmed, maybe there could be a
> cutoff date or version of bugs that are kept? Especially because if
> they are not confirmed or not confirmed for the current version, it
> will be difficult to get them to reproduce now, with maybe the
> reporter not using geary anymore or not the same version.

In Bugzilla at the moment that's where the Needinfo status helps out. 
For Geary, I've been tagging bugs with where some additional info is 
needed (usually Geary version, desktop and distro, debug logs or 
backtraces), and so on as Needinfo with a note asking for the missing 
info. then waiting for a while (a few weeks/months) and if the reporter 
never replied, resolving as Incomplete with a note saying it can be 
reopened if it's still a problem. This works pretty well for the most 
part.

//Mike

--
⊨ Michael Gratton, Percept Wrangler.
⚙ <http://mjog.vee.net/>