[yocto] 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 at 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
>
>>
>