On Fri, 01 Mar 2013 07:51:00 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 02/28/2013 11:51 PM, Tim Flink wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:37:01 -0700
> Tim Flink <tflink(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> There has already been a thread here on this topic  but after it
>> came up in the Fedora QA meeting yesterday, we decided to make an
>> actual proposal.
>> The concern raised is that notifications for development related
>> tickets for the blocker tracking app are out of place on the Test
>> To solve this, we have a couple of options:
>> 1. Start using the defaultcc plugin for trac such that emails for
>> the blocker tracking app are directed to a new qa-devel@ list
>> 2. Move all development related tickets out of the Fedora QA trac
>> into a new trac instance for the blocker tracking app which uses
>> qa-devel@ for notifications.
>> 3. Move all development related tickets to a different existing
>> trac (probably autoqa)
>> Personally, I don't have any really strong feelings about (1) or
>> (2). (1) is probably a little less work in the short term but (2)
>> isn't a bad idea. I'm somewhat strongly -1 on (3), though - If I
>> need to go through and do the work of moving tickets and changing
>> settings, I don't really want to be hacking up another project's
>> trac instance.
>> I've already started a thread on autoqa-devel@ asking about
>> combining that list with a new qa-devel@ . The initial response
>> has been positive - I don't expect that will be a problem.
>> Anyhow, thoughts on the possible solutions or how much work the
>> problem is worth?
> There hasn't been much of a response to this yet, so I'm assuming
> that everyone is OK with the idea of (1) and keeping the blocker
> tracking app bugs on the fedora-qa trac. If we're going to migrate
> to a new trac instance, I'd rather do it soon (in the next week)
> since we're getting close to the F19 branch date.
Did we not agree moving this into it's separated tracker or use
I remember that being discussed but IIRC, we decided to send a proposal
on how to move forward to the list for discussion.
> On a related note, the proposal to consolidate autoqa-devel@ and
> other QA development discussion on to a single list went over well
> and we've started migrating over to the new qa-devel@ list 
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/qa-devel
If autoqa is going to be using that mailing list as well then it
makes sense to move into their tracker as well.
Kamil pretty much covered everything that I would have said in his
email. Trac doesn't do well with multiple projects and while it happens
to not be terrible for BBA and fedora-qa, it doesn't work well in
I understand the desire to reduce the number of trac instances and
honestly, I'd rather not have another instance to admin. However, the
costs of having to deal with a sub-optimal tracker configuration just
for the sake of having a single instance are just too high to make