Re: FLP general bugs

2018-02-20 22:06 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste <[email protected]>:
> Le 18/02/2018 à 18:38, Piotr Drąg a écrit :
>>
>> Other language and l10n-requests are still useful, but the rest should
>> be disabled/removed, in my opinion. Maybe we can change the
>> description of the latter from the current “Requests for new Fedora
>> Localization, and other miscellaneous work” to “Bugs related to the
>> Fedora Localization Project as a whole” or similar.
>
> Hi, I also think we can disable these trackers.
>
> When I produce a report using every component of the "Fedora
> Localization" product [1], I see 10 bugs opened since 2017-01-01.
>
> Shouldn't we consider going further and disabling every
> language-specific Bugzilla components?
>
> Having one single localization place to issues would probably makes it
> easier for follow-up.
>
> While Bugzilla worked fine for years, many projects (docs, websites,
> etc.) uses Pagure. Shouldn't we consider moving all of our tracking in
> Pagure and find a way to advertise it in Bugzilla?
> Or can we create some kind of bridge (allow creating, and automatically
> clone the ticket on Pagure, then close the bug on Bugzilla with comment)?
>

Individual components for languages allow these communities to
subscribe to only their bugs. We can’t have a single “translation
bugs” component, I’d be an unmaintainable nightmare.

I also think it’s advantageous to have l10n bugs in the same place as
software bugs. Just being able to move a bug to a different product is
vital.

We do have https://pagure.io/g11n/issues and I think it can happily
co-exist with Bugzilla.

Best regards,

-- 
Piotr Drąg
https://piotrdrag.fedorapeople.org
_______________________________________________
trans mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]