The GNU Toolchain Infrastructure Project

Elena Zannoni
Thu Sep 29 18:40:45 GMT 2022

On 9/29/22 11:13 AM, Joseph Myers via Overseers wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Sep 2022, Jonathan Corbet via Overseers wrote:
>> Just for the record, it is still my feeling that the LF's infrastructure
>> management has been a good thing for the kernel community.  Whether it
>> would be suitable for the toolchain community is not something I'm in a
>> position to have an opinion on.  If anybody is curious about how
>> interactions with that group work, there is a current discussion on
>> bugzilla that might be interesting:
> Regarding Bugzilla, also see the GTI TAC meeting (24 Aug 2022) recording 
> at 23:37 to 25:44.  It's not clear what good solutions are right now for 
> free software issue tracking, taking into account considerations such as:
> * easy for anyone to submit and comment on bugs;
> * protection against spam bug and comment submission (which is in tension 
> with easy bug submission; we have restricted account creation, with people 
> needing to email overseers to create an account on sourceware Bugzilla at 
> all, or to email gcc-bugzilla-account-request to create an account on GCC 
> Bugzilla from a large number of common email domains in which spammers can 
> easily create accounts);
> * configurability of the fields and values of those fields and other logic 
> used in the bug tracker;
> * ability to get a local copy of the tracker data (this is an area where 
> Bugzilla is weak; you can probably do something with the REST API, but 
> it's not designed to make it easy for someone to keep a local copy of all 
> the data up to date the way git is);
> * being an actively maintained project (that also being a concern for 
> Bugzilla).

BTW, I am just noticing an announcement to revive Bugzilla that came out
in the last month or so:


More information about the Overseers mailing list