Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Saul Wold]

Folks,

After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla, 
there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's 
important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification, 
Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.

Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:

This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of 
the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.

I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the 
following projects (products/components) :

Yocto Projects
  - Cross-prelink
    - general
    - poky integration
  - Swabber
    - general
    - poky integration
  - Pseudo
    - general
    - poky integration
  - Eclipse Plugin
  - Anjuta Plugin
  - Yocto Image Creator (is this really standalone)?
  - Kernel
     - build
     - configuration
     - runtime
  - BSPs
     - by board??
  - Test Suite

Yocto Infrastructure
  - Autobuilder
  - Bugzilla
  - Website

Poky
  - Build System
    - bitbake
    - configuration
    - layers
    - general
  - Recipes
    - connectivity
    - core
    - devtools / tool chain
    - graphics
    - multimedia
    - demoapps
    - general
  - Documentation
    - Handbook
    - SDK
  - Security
  - SDK
    - tools
    - general

Comments?


-- 
     Sau!

Saul Wold
Yocto Component Wrangler @ Intel
Yocto Project / Poky Build System

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Darren Hart]

On 11/17/2010 03:32 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>
> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>
> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>
> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
> following projects (products/components) :
>
> Yocto Projects
...
> - Kernel
>   - build
>   - configuration
>   - runtime

Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>

> - BSPs
>   - by board??

Let's start off simple - by board might not scale well. Just "BSP" would 
be my vote - Bruce might have additional thoughts.

-- 
Darren Hart
Yocto Linux Kernel

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 10-11-17 8:29 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 03:32 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>>
>> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>>
>> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>>
>> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>> following projects (products/components) :
>>
>> Yocto Projects
> ...
>> - Kernel
>>    - build
>>    - configuration
>>    - runtime
>
> Acked-by: Darren Hart<dvhart@linux.intel.com>
>
>> - BSPs
>>    - by board??
>
> Let's start off simple - by board might not scale well. Just "BSP" would
> be my vote - Bruce might have additional thoughts.

This is the sane thing to do. One category 'bsp'. We can specify
the BSP in the subject of the bug. If a bug appears across a
class of BSPs or an arch, it gets bumped to kernel runtime and
is dealt with there.

We've been using this scheme for about 200 supported BSPs, so it
should do just fine here as well.

Cheers,

Bruce

>

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Saul Wold]

On 11/17/2010 09:13 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On 10-11-17 8:29 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>> On 11/17/2010 03:32 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>>> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>>> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>>> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>>>
>>> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>>>
>>> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>>> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>>> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>>>
>>> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>>> following projects (products/components) :
>>>
>>> Yocto Projects
>> ...
>>> - Kernel
>>> - build
>>> - configuration
>>> - runtime
>>
>> Acked-by: Darren Hart<dvhart@linux.intel.com>
>>
>>> - BSPs
>>> - by board??
>>
>> Let's start off simple - by board might not scale well. Just "BSP" would
>> be my vote - Bruce might have additional thoughts.
>
> This is the sane thing to do. One category 'bsp'. We can specify
> the BSP in the subject of the bug. If a bug appears across a
> class of BSPs or an arch, it gets bumped to kernel runtime and
> is dealt with there.
>
> We've been using this scheme for about 200 supported BSPs, so it
> should do just fine here as well.
>
OK, so should we 'demote' bsp to component or leave it a 'product'
level with 1 general component, just trying make sure we have flexibility.

Sau!

> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>>
>

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 10-11-18 12:23 AM, Saul Wold wrote:
> On 11/17/2010 09:13 PM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
>> On 10-11-17 8:29 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>>> On 11/17/2010 03:32 PM, Saul Wold wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Folks,
>>>>
>>>> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>>>> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>>>> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>>>> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>>>>
>>>> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>>>>
>>>> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>>>> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>>>> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>>>>
>>>> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>>>> following projects (products/components) :
>>>>
>>>> Yocto Projects
>>> ...
>>>> - Kernel
>>>> - build
>>>> - configuration
>>>> - runtime
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Darren Hart<dvhart@linux.intel.com>
>>>
>>>> - BSPs
>>>> - by board??
>>>
>>> Let's start off simple - by board might not scale well. Just "BSP" would
>>> be my vote - Bruce might have additional thoughts.
>>
>> This is the sane thing to do. One category 'bsp'. We can specify
>> the BSP in the subject of the bug. If a bug appears across a
>> class of BSPs or an arch, it gets bumped to kernel runtime and
>> is dealt with there.
>>
>> We've been using this scheme for about 200 supported BSPs, so it
>> should do just fine here as well.
>>
> OK, so should we 'demote' bsp to component or leave it a 'product'
> level with 1 general component, just trying make sure we have flexibility.
>

Keep the flexibility. That way if a particular BSP is maintained
differently, we have the ability to assign bugs to it and keep
them out of a global BSP queue.

At least that's my opinion :)

Bruce

> Sau!
>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Bruce
>>
>>>
>>

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Tian, Kevin]

>From: Saul Wold
>Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 7:32 AM
>
>
>Folks,
>
>After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>
>Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>
>This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>
>I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>following projects (products/components) :
>
>Yocto Projects
>  - Cross-prelink
>    - general
>    - poky integration
>  - Swabber
>    - general
>    - poky integration
>  - Pseudo
>    - general
>    - poky integration
>  - Eclipse Plugin
>  - Anjuta Plugin
>  - Yocto Image Creator (is this really standalone)?
>  - Kernel
>     - build
>     - configuration
>     - runtime
>  - BSPs
>     - by board??
>  - Test Suite
>
>Yocto Infrastructure
>  - Autobuilder
>  - Bugzilla
>  - Website
>
>Poky
>  - Build System
>    - bitbake
>    - configuration
>    - layers
>    - general

is it too subtle here? Just 'build system' may be easier to understand...

Thanks
Kevin

>  - Recipes
>    - connectivity
>    - core
>    - devtools / tool chain
>    - graphics
>    - multimedia
>    - demoapps
>    - general
>  - Documentation
>    - Handbook
>    - SDK
>  - Security
>  - SDK
>    - tools
>    - general
>
>Comments?
>
>
>--
>     Sau!
>
>Saul Wold
>Yocto Component Wrangler @ Intel
>Yocto Project / Poky Build System
>
>_______________________________________________
>yocto mailing list
>yocto@yoctoproject.org
>https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Saul Wold]

On 11/17/2010 09:21 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Saul Wold
>> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 7:32 AM
>>
>>
>> Folks,
>>
>> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>>
>> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>>
>> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>>
>> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>> following projects (products/components) :
>>
>> Yocto Projects
>>   - Cross-prelink
>>     - general
>>     - poky integration
>>   - Swabber
>>     - general
>>     - poky integration
>>   - Pseudo
>>     - general
>>     - poky integration
>>   - Eclipse Plugin
>>   - Anjuta Plugin
>>   - Yocto Image Creator (is this really standalone)?
>>   - Kernel
>>      - build
>>      - configuration
>>      - runtime
>>   - BSPs
>>      - by board??
>>   - Test Suite
>>
>> Yocto Infrastructure
>>   - Autobuilder
>>   - Bugzilla
>>   - Website
>>
>> Poky
>>   - Build System
>>     - bitbake
>>     - configuration
>>     - layers
>>     - general
>
> is it too subtle here? Just 'build system' may be easier to understand...
>
Honestly, I am not catching your meaning here.

Sau!

> Thanks
> Kevin
>
>>   - Recipes
>>     - connectivity
>>     - core
>>     - devtools / tool chain
>>     - graphics
>>     - multimedia
>>     - demoapps
>>     - general
>>   - Documentation
>>     - Handbook
>>     - SDK
>>   - Security
>>   - SDK
>>     - tools
>>     - general
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>>
>> --
>>      Sau!
>>
>> Saul Wold
>> Yocto Component Wrangler @ Intel
>> Yocto Project / Poky Build System
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yocto mailing list
>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto

Re: Bugzilla Reorg Take 2

[Tian, Kevin]

>From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw@linux.intel.com]
>Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 1:30 PM
>
>On 11/17/2010 09:21 PM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>> From: Saul Wold
>>> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 7:32 AM
>>>
>>>
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>> After reviewing the emails from the first attempt and review bugzilla,
>>> there are a couple of different approaches that can be taken. It's
>>> important to note that bugzilla supports 3 layers, Classification,
>>> Product and Components, version are tracked at the Product level.
>>>
>>> Since we have 3 Layers, there are 2 possible scenarios:
>>>
>>> This is the Yocto Projects Bugzilla, so each "project" can have it's
>>> own classification, I am not sure that this is the best since some of
>>> the projects are pretty flat the extra level does not make sense.
>>>
>>> I am proposing the following top level classifications, containing the
>>> following projects (products/components) :
>>>
>>> Yocto Projects
>>>   - Cross-prelink
>>>     - general
>>>     - poky integration
>>>   - Swabber
>>>     - general
>>>     - poky integration
>>>   - Pseudo
>>>     - general
>>>     - poky integration
>>>   - Eclipse Plugin
>>>   - Anjuta Plugin
>>>   - Yocto Image Creator (is this really standalone)?
>>>   - Kernel
>>>      - build
>>>      - configuration
>>>      - runtime
>>>   - BSPs
>>>      - by board??
>>>   - Test Suite
>>>
>>> Yocto Infrastructure
>>>   - Autobuilder
>>>   - Bugzilla
>>>   - Website
>>>
>>> Poky
>>>   - Build System
>>>     - bitbake
>>>     - configuration
>>>     - layers
>>>     - general
>>
>> is it too subtle here? Just 'build system' may be easier to understand...
>>
>Honestly, I am not catching your meaning here.
>
>Sau!

Sorry, I meant that we could just have "built system" there, and no need for next level.

Thanks,
Kevin

>
>> Thanks
>> Kevin
>>
>>>   - Recipes
>>>     - connectivity
>>>     - core
>>>     - devtools / tool chain
>>>     - graphics
>>>     - multimedia
>>>     - demoapps
>>>     - general
>>>   - Documentation
>>>     - Handbook
>>>     - SDK
>>>   - Security
>>>   - SDK
>>>     - tools
>>>     - general
>>>
>>> Comments?
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>      Sau!
>>>
>>> Saul Wold
>>> Yocto Component Wrangler @ Intel
>>> Yocto Project / Poky Build System
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yocto mailing list
>>> yocto@yoctoproject.org
>>> https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto