Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2015-10-11

[Matt Turner]

On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Anthony G. Basile <blueness@g.o> wrote:
>> So perhaps it was unwise for us to get into a situation where either 1) we
>> violate the Social Contract or 2) we have to surmount a technically
>> difficult situation.
>>
>
> I don't see how mirroring github on bugzilla violates our social
> contract, for several reasons:

That's not what his claim was. You misunderstood, so most of the rest
of your reply is irrelevant.

To explain, his claim was that we either (1) will be violating the
Social Contract by relying on github, or (2) have to solve a difficult
technical problem (to mirror github data in bugzilla).

> 1.  Developers aren't required to post patches to bugzilla before
> committing them to the tree, so nothing is lost by posting patches on
> github that might otherwise not be posted anywhere.
> 2.  Developers aren't required to open bugs on bugzilla before fixing
> bugs.  So, nothing is lost by opening pull requests on github that
> might otherwise not be opened anywhere.
> 3.  Developers aren't required to close bugs on bugzilla even if other
> people do open them.  Sure, that might be "rude" in some sense, and
> others can of course step in and co-maintain packages and close bugs.
> But, we don't kick out developers if they ignore bugs.  I don't think
> we'd even treeclean a package with an open critical security bug if
> the developer fixed the bug in the repo and just left the bug open.
>
> Bugzilla is already an optional part of our workflow as far as I can
> tell.  The proposal is to just add another optional tool to the
> workflow.

I find that to be absurd, and I really don't think that "bugzilla is
just an optional tool" is a serious argument.

> The proposed integration is just another way to enter data into
> bugzilla.  Devs are free to pretend that no data exists which isn't in
> the bug, and if somebody contributes a patch the dev is more than
> welcome to donate their time independently creating and testing the
> same patch instead of looking in a proprietary tool to see the patch
> somebody helpfully donated to us already.
>
> Nobody is required to use github to contribute to Gentoo, and nothing
> is really lost that we'd otherwise be certain to have if it goes away,
> so I don't see the conflict with our social contract.

Again, you're making a silly point that people don't *have* to use bugzilla.