Triaging Déjà Dup

[Vej]

Hello Michael, hello everyone else.

Déjà Dup recently “moved” its bug tracker to https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/deja-dup, causing me to think about how we should handle things related to this:

• Do we want “upstream” bugs of Déjà Dup coming in at https://bugs.launchpad.net/deja-dup or do we want to close this? Should I mark them as duplicates if they are filed in the Gitlab?

• Do we want to migrate existing ones?

• Should I give priorities on the Gitlab? If so how?

• Should I mark the upstream as affected for bugs filed against the ubuntu package, or do you want me to use the bug tracker with the Gitlab for bugs not listed in the Launchpad of the upstream package?

Thanks for reading trough this and a nice day

Vej

[mterry (Michael Terry)]

Hi Vej! These are good questions.

I still pay attention to Launchpad bugs. But I did update our docs / website to link to gitlab issues a while back, since Launchpad started feeling less important. Duplicity moved to gitlab.com, so sharing bugs there felt less useful, and GNOME’s gitlab has better integration between merge requests and issues.

So it wasn’t exactly a carefully considered move. Just kind of something that slowly happened as I paid more attention to gitlab issues and folks added reports there. I probably should have started a discussion up front about it – asking the questions you are – before updating any docs. Sorry for that, and thanks for starting that conversation.

But on to your questions.

• Upstreaming / marking-as-duplicates. I did this a little bit already when trying to consolidate some “discussion” tickets like multiple-profiles or advanced-scheduling. But most of our tickets feel like support issues, which I haven’t yet felt the need to move around or duplicate. I’m fine with keeping the launchpad bug tracker open for now? Helpful for some bug sharing with Ubuntu and for all the old links out there to it. Though I agree that having two bug trackers could lead to confusion. What do you think here?

• Migrating existing ones. If we did decide to shut down launchpad bugs, it’d probably be worth going through the bugs to see which are still useful and port them. But if we’re OK with keeping both trackers around, migrating seems less important.

• Priorities - I think this would be done via labels, which we can define - https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/deja-dup/-/labels. I’ve just made your account a “Reporter” on deja-dup’s gitlab so you have special access to assign and/or edit labels. I’m open to a better set of labels. When most issues come in, I’ve been using the “Support” label pretty liberally until I can tell whether it’s an actionable bug or what.

• If we are fine with keeping Launchpad’s tracker around, marking upstream-as-affected seems good. I’'ll still get an email about it and am happy to keep talking in Launchpad.

So I guess the question is - do we think the confusion of having bug reports in two places outweighs the pain of a transition? I’d been kind of defaulting to not worrying about the confusion. But I’m open to the idea that it’s bad.

Thanks as always for your help, Vej!