FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > CentOS > CentOS Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-26-2010, 07:49 PM
Matt Rose
 
Default handling ABRT

> Am 26.11.10 20:35, schrieb Matt Rose:
>
>> from a quick once-over of the code, resubmitting to a bugzilla instance
>> hosted at centos only requires a change to a config file. I'm gonna try
>> building it and see if there's anything more regarding plugins that we
>> can
>> disable at runtime, but this looks quite easy *if* we have a
>> bugzilla.c.o.
>
> The problem is that we don't have a bugzilla.c.o, but a mantis.c.o.
> Although there seems to be some xmlrpc plugin for mantis (which I
> haven't checked out), probably noone has tested that yet.
>
> The other solution would be to run a b.c.o, but that takes work to
> setup, more work to get the accounts over and even more work to reimport
> the bugs, afaics.
>
> If you know about a working solution on how to do that, I'd be curious.
>

The solution proposed by Fabian was to have a separate bugzilla.c.o, that
would take bugs from abrt, and then a manual process to move them either
to bugzilla.redhat.com, or bugs.centos.org, or, more likely, just ignore
them, but, most importantly, not have them go outside of centos.org which
is Karanbir's main concern right now.

Matt

> Ralph
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 07:57 PM
Felix Schwarz
 
Default handling ABRT

Am 26.11.2010 19:44, schrieb Karanbir Singh:
> - Last option: get a plugin together that can do what's needed to file
> at bugs.c.o ( we might need a few more people to get involved with
> triage and handling of issues via that route! )

Personally I don't really like abrt. In Fedora I feel that abrt reports
go mostly unnoticed and just flood the maintainers. IMHO abrt
functionality would be useful for something like kerneloops but not more.

As developer usually you only care about reproducible crashes however
(for me personally) that's only a small subset of crashes detected by
abrt. So I'd recommend against sending abrt reports to bugs.c.o.

Just my 2 from personal Fedora experience.

fs
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 08:01 PM
Ralph Angenendt
 
Default handling ABRT

Am 26.11.10 21:49, schrieb Matt Rose:
>> The other solution would be to run a b.c.o, but that takes work to
>> setup, more work to get the accounts over and even more work to reimport
>> the bugs, afaics.
>>
>> If you know about a working solution on how to do that, I'd be curious.
>>
>
> The solution proposed by Fabian was to have a separate bugzilla.c.o, that
> would take bugs from abrt, and then a manual process to move them either
> to bugzilla.redhat.com, or bugs.centos.org, or, more likely, just ignore
> them, but, most importantly, not have them go outside of centos.org which
> is Karanbir's main concern right now.

I am not going to run two different bug reporting instances. Others in
c.org probably won't want to do that either

So it is either abrt without reporting, no abrt, or b.c.o running on a
bugzilla instance, afaics.

And I have no problem changing b.c.o from mantis to bugzilla, *if*
people not only want to, but do help. But remember: Old bugs have to get
either resolved or moved over.

Ralph
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 08:06 PM
Matt Rose
 
Default handling ABRT

> Am 26.11.10 21:04, schrieb Florian La Roche:
>> AFAIK one of the reasons for mantis was also not to duplicate
>> the reports within bugzilla.redhat.com and make sure all
>> reports that also match for the Red Hat Enterprise Release
>> get tracked "upstream".
>
> Well, that is the reason to have our own bug tracker, but that is not
> the reason to have two different technical platforms for that.
>
> As said: Mantis is a much more harmless beast to handle, at least at the
> time I last looked at bugzilla (somewhere in the middle of the bugzilla
> 2 cycle).
>
> If that has changed and if the opinion of most people here is that it
> would be better to switch to bugzilla: Sure, if somebody (or more than
> one person) wants to help with it.
>

Speaking as the only System Engineer/Build Engineer/SCM
maintainer/Bugzilla maintainer at my work, I can say that bugzilla is
definitely not a full-time job. If you give me access to a c.o machine I
could probably set one up in an afternoon.

> We could phase out mantis, but beware: We don't just need a place to
> file CentOS 6 bugs against, we'd also need to track CentOS 4 and 5 bugs
> in there. And we'd need a few people to look at all still open bugs in
> b.c.o and decide if those should be taken over to a new bug reporting
> facility or not.
>
> And I am not sure if we - at the moment - have the time to do that
> before 6 comes out.

It's not a good idea, period. This is something that centos should do
according to our own schedule. Setting up a separate bugzilla instance
just to receive abrt submissions is a way of taking back control over the
timing of this important decision.

>
> Helpful hands are always welcome.
>
> Ralph
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 08:20 PM
Ralph Angenendt
 
Default handling ABRT

Am 26.11.10 22:06, schrieb Matt Rose:

> Speaking as the only System Engineer/Build Engineer/SCM
> maintainer/Bugzilla maintainer at my work, I can say that bugzilla is
> definitely not a full-time job. If you give me access to a c.o machine I
> could probably set one up in an afternoon.

Hmmm. Need to think about that. Can you write up what would be needed to
do that? Database? I'm afraid that that will be another sink for user
accounts, and we already have quite a few of those. Do you think there
would be any chance to reuse the b.c.o accounts from mantis?

I could tell you how those look in the database.

>> And I am not sure if we - at the moment - have the time to do that
>> before 6 comes out.
>
> It's not a good idea, period. This is something that centos should do
> according to our own schedule. Setting up a separate bugzilla instance
> just to receive abrt submissions is a way of taking back control over the
> timing of this important decision.

Okay, that sounds rather sane. Other opinions on that?

Ralph
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 08:37 PM
Matt Rose
 
Default handling ABRT

> Am 26.11.10 22:06, schrieb Matt Rose:
>
>> Speaking as the only System Engineer/Build Engineer/SCM
>> maintainer/Bugzilla maintainer at my work, I can say that bugzilla is
>> definitely not a full-time job. If you give me access to a c.o machine
>> I
>> could probably set one up in an afternoon.
>
> Hmmm. Need to think about that. Can you write up what would be needed to
> do that? Database?

The main things are MySQL, Perl, an MTA, and Apache2. There's a whackload
of perl modules that are needed as well that I don't remember off the top
of my head. There's a checksetup perl script that will install them if
you don't mind polluting your system with CPAN modules. If not, I think
Dag has all of the perl modules as rpms.

Requirements are listed here.
http://www.bugzilla.org/docs/3.0/html/installation.html

I'm afraid that that will be another sink for user
> accounts, and we already have quite a few of those. Do you think there
> would be any chance to reuse the b.c.o accounts from mantis?

With my use case, bugzilla.c.o would only need a couple of users to triage
and treat appropriately.

Honestly, I think this may not be a bad way to do things permanently,
based on Felix's experiences from using abrt in Fedora, as it would let
developers concentrate on reproducible bugs.

Matt

>
> Ralph
> _______________________________________________
> CentOS-devel mailing list
> CentOS-devel@centos.org
> http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
>

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-26-2010, 09:52 PM
Jeff Johnson
 
Default handling ABRT

On Nov 26, 2010, at 4:01 PM, Ralph Angenendt wrote:

>
> So it is either abrt without reporting, no abrt, or b.c.o running on a
> bugzilla instance, afaics.
>

There are fallacies in reaching the conclusion that
those are the only possible outcomes.

The argument chain that leads to those alternative resolutions
goes something like this:

Q: Are segfault's (tracked by ABRT) bugs?
A: Almost certainly.

Q: And where do bug reports get filed go ... ?
A: In a bugzilla! duh!

which leads to a certain narrow perspective and Q.E.D conclusion:
1) rip ABRT out of CentOS
2) cripple ABRT or gimp it up with "no reporting"
3) set up a b.c.o instance

Bugzilla is almost certainly a reasonable end-point for ABRT
if you have gazillions of paid employees who are
paid (as part of a "service" model) to track
store-bought product defects and paying customer complaints.

But is that the right model for CentOS? Hardly imho ...

The better model is what is being done with kernel.org bugs
(which I claim was studied when ABRT was written. I'm sure
there were other implementations at M$ and with Apple radar blips too).

With kernel.org, bugs are tracked as a software devel process metric, not as
a paid wage slave performance indicator.

SO I suggest that you should look at other alternative end-points
for ABRT automated segfault/bug end-points, and view as a
objective distro "process" metric to prioritize scarce resources, not track,
bug reports. No user id's needed is just one of many benefits.

Unless you really like sipping from a bugzilla fire hose,
with everyone 2nd and 3rd guessing whatever solution you
attempted to solve a reported problem. There are hair shorts and
strait jackets for those who really MUSTHAVE their nagware to
Get Things Done!

JMHO, YMMV, everyone's does, yadda, yadda.

hth

73 de Jeff

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-27-2010, 06:53 AM
Florian La Roche
 
Default handling ABRT

> Okay, that sounds rather sane. Other opinions on that?

Adding bugzilla would enlarge the centos infrastructure and
would be a good step.

regards,

Florian La Roche

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-29-2010, 09:10 AM
Christoph Maser
 
Default handling ABRT

Am Freitag, den 26.11.2010, 22:20 +0100 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
> Am 26.11.10 22:06, schrieb Matt Rose:
>
> > Speaking as the only System Engineer/Build Engineer/SCM
> > maintainer/Bugzilla maintainer at my work, I can say that bugzilla is
> > definitely not a full-time job. If you give me access to a c.o machine I
> > could probably set one up in an afternoon.
>
> Hmmm. Need to think about that. Can you write up what would be needed to
> do that? Database? I'm afraid that that will be another sink for user
> accounts, and we already have quite a few of those. Do you think there
> would be any chance to reuse the b.c.o accounts from mantis?
>
> I could tell you how those look in the database.
>

Wasn't there some efforts for LDAP user accounts for website version 2
and a new forum? Bugzilla integrates very well and flexible with LDAP.

Chris

_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 
Old 11-29-2010, 10:39 AM
Marcus Moeller
 
Default handling ABRT

Hi Christoph,

> Am Freitag, den 26.11.2010, 22:20 +0100 schrieb Ralph Angenendt:
>> Am 26.11.10 22:06, schrieb Matt Rose:
>>
>> > Speaking as the only System Engineer/Build Engineer/SCM
>> > maintainer/Bugzilla maintainer at my work, I can say that bugzilla is
>> > definitely not a full-time job. *If you give me access to a c.o machine I
>> > could probably set one up in an afternoon.
>>
>> Hmmm. Need to think about that. Can you write up what would be needed to
>> do that? Database? I'm afraid that that will be another sink for user
>> accounts, and we already have quite a few of those. Do you think there
>> would be any chance to reuse the b.c.o accounts from mantis?
>>
>> I could tell you how those look in the database.
>>
>
> Wasn't there some efforts for LDAP user accounts for website version 2
> and a new forum? Bugzilla integrates very well and flexible with LDAP.

Yes, but we are still in need of an account creation frontend.

--
Greets
Marcus
_______________________________________________
CentOS-devel mailing list
CentOS-devel@centos.org
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org