On Thursday, 4 July 2019 17:43:06 CEST Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On donderdag 4 juli 2019 13:02:24 CEST Kai Uwe Broulik wrote:
> > I complained about the same thing but I was told you can replicate most
> > of those (OS, platform, etc) using tags/badges and project structures.
> > There isn't a 1:1 mapping of fields and tech we got used to from Bugzilla.
>
> And then I thought to check how GIMP is handling this. It's not pretty: four
> pages of label definitions (and keep in mind that all labels are available
> both to merge requests and issues). Creating a query when there are so many
> labels is exceedingly hard, as I imagine actually managing them and tagging
> reports with them. See https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/labels
>
> A second problem here is that these labels are defined _per project_. That
> means that any common way of handling bugs among KDE projects will
> disappear.
On top of that, anything requiring manual per-repo setup isn't going to work
for projects with split repos, such as PIM (50+) or Frameworks (70+).
Small correction here - From my understanding you can define labels at the group level, which are then shared with all the underlying subgroups and projects (repositories).
At some point depending on how things go I expect us to need to define some labels at varying group levels.
> Sorry, but I don't see any way this is going to end well. KDE projects
> should not use the gitlab issues feature for bug reports. Use of the issues
> feature should be reserved for replacing the phabricator tasks
> functionality. KDE should continue to use bugzilla.
From what I have seen of Gitlab so far (which I like in general as it removes
the error-prone arcanist from my workflow), I have to agree with that.
Regards,
Volker
Cheers,
Ben