Bugzilla spring cleaning

Pedro Alves palves@redhat.com
Fri Feb 28 19:57:00 GMT 2014

On 02/28/2014 05:15 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 3:17 AM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 02/27/2014 06:11 PM, Doug Evans wrote:
>>> Hi.
>>> There's a few cleanups I've wanted to see happen on our Bugzilla site.
>>> The ones that are currently on my mind are these:
>>> 1) Remove old entries from the "Versions" list.
>>> Do we really need 3.x and 4.x here?
>>> Personally, I can see deleting 5.x too, and replacing all of them with
>>> a "catch-all" field for old releases.
>>> [I can also see deleting 6.x, but "baby steps" ...]
>> What's the actual problem this is trying to solve?
> Improve the S/N ratio for users entering bugs.

OK, that's more focused.  You just said the "Versions" list,
and that to me implied bug search as well, not just the new
bug form.

>>> I can imagine their appearance in some old bug making it
>>> hard/impossible to accomplish this, but I won't know unless I ask.
>> If there are bugs filed against those versions, then I don't
>> see the point in removing them.
> Neither do I! [What words did I used to convey such a significant
> probability that that is what I wanted?  Let me know so I won't use
> them again.  :-)]

- "spring cleaning" in the subject makes me go into "delete cruft"

- You hinted at "deleting 6.x" too.  As surely you'll know there are
bugs filed against those versions, I was led me to believe
you wanted to just delete the bugs along with the versions, if
possible.  But I see now that you meant instead to merge those
into the "catch-all" for old versions.

> That is why I raised the possibility that what I want to achieve is
> not achievable (*1).
> OTOH, *if* we can remove entries from the Versions list, *and* it
> doesn't affect existing bugs, then I'd like to do so.


>>> 1b) IWBN to reverse-sort the Versions list.
>> I agree this is one would indeed be very nice.  It's quite
>> likely we have bugs erroneously reported against old versions
>> simply because of this issue.  Bugs converted from the old
>> gnats (which I believe is the majority of filed bugs) fortunately
>> have the "Release" field in the description text, so we
>> could fix any in that situation.  Furthermore, it seems to me
>> that doing this pretty much would make the issue of eliminating
>> old versions practically moot?
> The older versions in the list are still clutter and noise.

Alright, now we're focusing only on the version list in the
new bug form.  Here I agree there's no need to allow reporting
bugs against older versions.

> Plus even with a reverse-sorted list it's still possible for users to
> accidentally file a bug for the wrong version.  Do we actually intend
> to put any time into such old versions?  I don't.  

Nor do I.

> So let's turn it
> around, what's the justification (setting aside caveat (*1) above),
> for keeping them?

Well, if you were talking about bug search, knowing which gdb
version a bug was filed against.  So I see no real good upside
to merging old versions into a single catch-all for old releases,
at some arbitrary moving cut off date -- I'd rather preserve history.

For the new bug form, none that I'd insist on myself
(discounting possible Bugzilla technical limitations).

So the real question should be IMO:

 Should we allow users to report new bugs against old versions of
 GDB the community no longer supports?

And here we agree.  In my opinion, no, we shouldn't.

Pedro Alves

More information about the Gdb mailing list