Re: Emacs project mission (was Re: "If you're still seeing problems, please reopen." [

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Yuri Khan <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 02:27:28 +0700
> Cc: Michael Albinus <address@hidden>, Óscar Fuentes <address@hidden>, 
>       Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden>, address@hidden, 
> address@hidden, 
>       Emacs developers <address@hidden>
> 
> The GNOME project migrated from Bugzilla some time ago. The general
> scheme of migration was:
> 
> * The target GitLab instance has a dedicated “bugzilla-migration” user
> account (the “UFO” Dmitry mentioned).
> * For each bug in the source Bugzilla instance, a new GitLab issue is
> created by the bugzilla-migration user, with a link to the original
> Bugzilla bug, a copy of the bug description, and a reference to the
> original bug author.
> * For each comment to the original bug, a new comment in the migrated
> issue is also created by the bugzilla-migration user, with a copy of
> the comment and a reference to the comment author.
> * The original bug gets a new comment with an explanation of the
> migration and a link to the migrated issue. Each user who was
> subscribed to the original bug gets a copy of this comment, and can go
> register at the target GitLab instance and re-subscribe to the
> migrated issue at his/her leisure.
> 
> An example of a migrated bug/issue:
> 
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=766142
> https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-sudoku/issues/25

Thanks, but I don't understand what that means in practice, when an
old bug is worked on after the migration.  Is the original author of
the bug report subscribed to the correspondence about the bug after
the migration, or does he/she need to actively subscribe to it?  If
the latter, I don't think the solution is satisfactory.