[CentOS-devel] Hosting CentOS bugs on RH bugzilla

Wed Apr 8 17:05:45 UTC 2015
Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com>

On Tue, 07 Apr 2015 15:49:32 -0700
Karsten Wade <kwade at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hash: SHA1
> On 04/07/2015 02:35 PM, Lokesh Mandvekar wrote:
> > Given that we now have a lot of co-operation amongst
> > CentOS-RHEL-Fedora, I was hoping we could host CentOS bugs on RH's
> > bugzilla instance itself under a CentOS product, just like how we
> > have Fedora and RHEL products.
> A few questions that come to mind ...
> What is the SLA that Fedora has around bugzilla.redhat.com? (One clear
> advantage of running our own bug tracker is full autonomy.)

There's no formal SLA that I know of (I'd love to be wrong!). 
That said, bugzilla has proved pretty stable over the years. Sometimes
it's slow, there have been a few outages, but overall it's pretty

> What is the process like to get changes made to Bugzilla to support
> project needs?

Depends. On the Fedora side we have a account that has permissions to
do a number of things with the "Fedora" product. So, we can just manage
all that ourselves without bothering anyone else. I would expect/hope
CentOS would get something setup similarly. 

> Are we able to have all the granularity we need as just a sub-product
> in Bugzilla? (E.g. for SIGs where we might have multiple versions of a
> package for the same major version of CentOS.)

I guess that would need some kind of tree setup: 

CentOS product
  SIG 1 
       package foo
  SIG 2
       package foo

> Can CentOS QA or security track issues privately as part of a group in
> the product? (By this I include being able to block all other users
> including @redhat.com accounts.)

The bugzilla folks have been open to creating new groups and such in
the past. For example abrt sometimes marks bugs private when it thinks
they have a high security impact. In fedora this marks them now in a
group that the fedora maintainer can read/unmark, etc. 


I'm not in a good position to answer the rest of the excellent
questions here. Hopefully those that use the current centos bug
tracker/qa folks, etc will chime in with thoughts on these. 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20150408/d9b287a8/attachment-0008.sig>