debbugs status

debbugs status

[Glenn Morris]

So, has it been definitely decided that we are going to use debbugs?
Bug #1 was filed one year ago.

Personally, I think it seems ok, certainly better than nothing. It's
just a shame it's so resistant to change. I doubt anybody will
volunteer to set up a trial of anything else that meets the
requirements, so that's probably it.

If we are going to use it, is there any prospect of moving it to a gnu
host sometime soon?

Don apparently has no time to do anything with it. The web-pages are
still largely wrong for Emacs. Older bugs are slowly accreting spam
that we are not able to delete (also prevents bugs from archiving). It
looks unprofessional.

Re: debbugs status

[Chong Yidong]

Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:

> If we are going to use it, is there any prospect of moving it to a gnu
> host sometime soon?
>
> Don apparently has no time to do anything with it. The web-pages are
> still largely wrong for Emacs. Older bugs are slowly accreting spam
> that we are not able to delete (also prevents bugs from archiving). It
> looks unprofessional.

We have a gnu.org machine ready for use.  A couple of weeks ago, Don
said that he had some time to move the bug database.  However, things
apparently got stuck at that point.  Don, what's the latest?

Re: debbugs status

[Xavier Maillard]

   Personally, I think it seems ok, certainly better than nothing. It's
   just a shame it's so resistant to change. I doubt anybody will
   volunteer to set up a trial of anything else that meets the
   requirements, so that's probably it.

What do you mean ? What is so "resistant to change" ?

	Xavier
-- 
http://www.gnu.org
http://www.april.org
http://www.lolica.org

Re: debbugs status

[Stefan Monnier]

>> If we are going to use it, is there any prospect of moving it to a gnu
>> host sometime soon?
>> 
>> Don apparently has no time to do anything with it. The web-pages are
>> still largely wrong for Emacs. Older bugs are slowly accreting spam
>> that we are not able to delete (also prevents bugs from archiving). It
>> looks unprofessional.

> We have a gnu.org machine ready for use.  A couple of weeks ago, Don
> said that he had some time to move the bug database.  However, things
> apparently got stuck at that point.  Don, what's the latest?

IIUC we're still waiting for the FSF guys to reinstall the VM's OS.


        Stefan

debbugs status

[Michael Albinus]

Hi,

since yesterday, debbugs handling of messages has been blocked. We are
working on this (thank you, Glenn!), and we hope to reinject missing
messages until tomorrow.

Just to let you know.

Best regards, Michael.

Re: debbugs status

[Michael Albinus]

Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de> writes:

Hi,

> since yesterday, debbugs handling of messages has been blocked. We are
> working on this (thank you, Glenn!), and we hope to reinject missing
> messages until tomorrow.

For the records, things are back to being normal. Missing messages have
been requeued (thanks to Glenn and Bob!).

If you still miss a message, please drop us a note to
<sysadmin@debbugs.gnu.org>, or simply resend it.

Best regards, Michael.

Re: debbugs status

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Michael Albinus <michael.albinus@gmx.de>
> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 10:50:18 +0200
> 
> > since yesterday, debbugs handling of messages has been blocked. We are
> > working on this (thank you, Glenn!), and we hope to reinject missing
> > messages until tomorrow.
> 
> For the records, things are back to being normal. Missing messages have
> been requeued (thanks to Glenn and Bob!).

Thank you all for working on fixing this.