Branch Intelligence in Bugzilla

Max Kanat-Alexander mkanat at
Thu Jul 27 21:51:07 UTC 2006

On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 11:28 -0700, L. David Baron wrote:
> For example, we're starting triage
> for the 1.9 cycle around now, but it's not going to branch for more than
> 6 months from now.

	Hrm. So perhaps a way to note that a certain branch always appear on
all versions would be useful? And then later you can move the fields to
showing up only on bugs filed against 1.9. But if you'd set any values
in the fields on old bugs, the fields would still show up there.

	I'm just trying to come up with some *ideal* way to handle the
situation that you're in, because it's actually an extremely common
situation, and I'd like to be able to deploy it generically to all users
of Bugzilla as a part of the upstream code.

> If we had the
> ability to have branch statuses for bugs we'd essentially want to copy
> trunk status to branch status at the branch point.

	Okay, easy enough. So it might be good for Bugzilla to understand the
idea that branches are related to other branches. That is, most branches
come from the trunk, and thus anything on the trunk before "date X" is
also on the branch.

> If a bug is filed against the trunk, it might be a
> regression since an already-existing branch branched, or it might be an
> old bug that is also present on the branch.  There could be significant
> confusion if the bug system automatically assumed either default, so I
> suspect an unknown status might be needed.

	Well, if you just selected that it affected the trunk, by my proposal
the system wouldn't say *anything* about the branch until you also said
that it affected the branch.

Competent, Friendly Bugzilla Services. And Everything Else, too.

More information about the developers mailing list