[lldb-dev] How to preserve command history?

[Andrzej Warzynski via lldb-dev]

Hello,

I've just tried using lldb on Ubuntu* and I couldn't get the command
history to work. More specifically, the command history was not
preserved between the sessions. IIUC, one has to create the lldb-history
file for this to work:

mkdir -p ~/.lldb/
touch ~/.lldb/lldb-history

This is rather non-obvious and AFAIK undocumented solution (and very
different to what's required with GDB).

Is there a better way to achieve this? Would it make sense to update the
docs with this information (e.g.
https://lldb.llvm.org/man/lldb.html#configuration-files)? I'm happy to
submit a patch.

Thanks,
-Andrzej

* lldb-8 on Ubuntu 16.04
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] How to preserve command history?

[Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann via lldb-dev]

LLDB is explicitly creating the .lldb directory for the user (see Editline.cpp 
-> GetHistoryFilePath). Is this also happening in a more recent LLDB version? 
It’s working for me on the latest release on Arch.

> On Apr 20, 2020, at 4:34 PM, Andrzej Warzynski via lldb-dev 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I've just tried using lldb on Ubuntu* and I couldn't get the command
> history to work. More specifically, the command history was not
> preserved between the sessions. IIUC, one has to create the lldb-history
> file for this to work:
> 
> mkdir -p ~/.lldb/
> touch ~/.lldb/lldb-history
> 
> This is rather non-obvious and AFAIK undocumented solution (and very
> different to what's required with GDB).
> 
> Is there a better way to achieve this? Would it make sense to update the
> docs with this information (e.g.
> https://lldb.llvm.org/man/lldb.html#configuration-files)? I'm happy to
> submit a patch.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Andrzej
> 
> * lldb-8 on Ubuntu 16.04
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended 
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the 
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the 
> information in any medium. Thank you.
> ___
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] How to preserve command history?

[Andrzej Warzynski via lldb-dev]

Cheers for your quick reply! You're probably referring to this:

https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/01bcc3e9371470e1974f066ced353df15e10056d/lldb/source/Host/common/Editline.cpp#L216

That's a fairly recent change so that explains why it didn't work for me
with lldb-8. I've also checked lldb-10 on Arch and that indeed works
out-of-the-box. Guess I need to make sure I always use the latest and
greatest.

-Andrzej

On 20/04/2020 15:39, Raphael “Teemperor” Isemann wrote:

LLDB is explicitly creating the .lldb directory for the user (see Editline.cpp 
-> GetHistoryFilePath). Is this also happening in a more recent LLDB version? 
It’s working for me on the latest release on Arch.


On Apr 20, 2020, at 4:34 PM, Andrzej Warzynski via lldb-dev 
 wrote:

Hello,

I've just tried using lldb on Ubuntu* and I couldn't get the command
history to work. More specifically, the command history was not
preserved between the sessions. IIUC, one has to create the lldb-history
file for this to work:

mkdir -p ~/.lldb/
touch ~/.lldb/lldb-history

This is rather non-obvious and AFAIK undocumented solution (and very
different to what's required with GDB).

Is there a better way to achieve this? Would it make sense to update the
docs with this information (e.g.
https://lldb.llvm.org/man/lldb.html#configuration-files)? I'm happy to
submit a patch.

Thanks,
-Andrzej

* lldb-8 on Ubuntu 16.04
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev



IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

[lldb-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Tom Stellard via lldb-dev]

Hi,

I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to Github.
It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the proposal
and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.

== Here is the original proposal:

http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html

== What has changed:

* You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
  labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github actions
  that will be used for this.

* Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.

* We have the initial list of labels: 
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels

== Remaining issue:

* There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are some 
options
that we have discussed:

1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla that are
still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means that over
time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs are 
closed
out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla will be 
archived
into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project repo.

2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone to
manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the 
llvm-project
repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate 
high-traffic
or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility of 
the bug.
This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.

3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub issues at 
the same time.
Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub repository, and 
active bugs
would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.


The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be archived 
from bugzilla
to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that we 
can migrate
to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive bugs 
during the
transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely several 
months)
while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to GitHub.


The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns raised 
on the list
that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time would
be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and 
hopefully we can
come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.

Thanks,
Tom

___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Richard Smith via lldb-dev]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to
> Github.
> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the
> proposal
> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
>
> == Here is the original proposal:
>
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
>
> == What has changed:
>
> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github
> actions
>   that will be used for this.
>
> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
>
> * We have the initial list of labels:
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
>
> == Remaining issue:
>
> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are some
> options
> that we have discussed:
>
> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla that
> are
> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means that
> over
> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs
> are closed
> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla will
> be archived
> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project
> repo.
>
> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone to
> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the
> llvm-project
> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate
> high-traffic
> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility
> of the bug.
> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
>
> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub
> issues at the same time.
> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
> repository, and active bugs
> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
>

Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are
lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere
in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx, and if we can preserve
all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain substantially.


> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
> archived from bugzilla
> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that
> we can migrate
> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive bugs
> during the
> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely
> several months)
> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to
> GitHub.
>
>
> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns
> raised on the list
> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time
> would
> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and
> hopefully we can
> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
> ___
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Tom Stellard via lldb-dev]

On 04/20/2020 12:49 PM, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev 
> mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to 
> Github.
> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the 
> proposal
> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
> 
> == Here is the original proposal:
> 
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> 
> == What has changed:
> 
> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github 
> actions
>   that will be used for this.
> 
> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
> 
> * We have the initial list of labels: 
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> 
> == Remaining issue:
> 
> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are some 
> options
> that we have discussed:
> 
> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla 
> that are
> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means 
> that over
> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs 
> are closed
> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla 
> will be archived
> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project 
> repo.
> 
> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone 
> to
> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the 
> llvm-project
> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate 
> high-traffic
> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility 
> of the bug.
> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> 
> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub 
> issues at the same time.
> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub 
> repository, and active bugs
> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> 
> 
> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are 
> lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere in 
> the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx , 
> and if we can preserve all the issue numbers this would ease the transition 
> pain substantially.
>  

For all 3 proposals we want to be able to preserver the llvm.org/PR links 
so that
they continue to provide useful information.  Eventually once bugzilla is shut 
down,
those links would point to an issue somewhere in GitHub.

We don't have a solution for this today and this is one of the reasons why 
proposal
3 will take so long to implement, because we need to solve this problem before 
we start any
kind of transition.

This is also the reason why proposals 1 and 2 were originally favored, because 
they allow us
to transition to GitHub issues for new bugs sooner, while still maintaining the 
PR
links in bugzilla.  This gives us time to work out a good long-term solution to 
maintaining
the links without further delaying the transition to GitHub issues.

-Tom



> 
> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be 
> archived from bugzilla
> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that 
> we can migrate
> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive 
> bugs during the
> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely 
> several months)
> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to 
> GitHub.
> 
> 
> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns 
> raised on the list
> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time 
> would
> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and 
> hopefully we can
> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> 
> ___
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org 
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 

___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Anton Korobeynikov via lldb-dev]

> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are 
> lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere in 
> the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx, and if we can preserve all 
> the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain substantially.
Well... I hate to say this, but quite unlikely. Unfortunately, there
were significant changes in GitHub opensource team and these days they
are much less responsive than they used to be during our github
migration. I asked this question several times, and unfortunately,
there is no answer. I will certainly keep trying.

The problem here is there is no way to assign / control issue numbers
at all. They are just automatically assigned in sequential order.
While it might be possible to utilize this while migrating everything
to, say, a special archive project on GitHub, we will not be able to
control the numbers assigned should we migrate the issues one-by-one
or just move from archive to main project.

So, the only viable way seems to be plain big mapping from bugzilla to
github issue numbers without anything simple like "llvm.org/PRxx
becomes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/xx";.


--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Anton Korobeynikov via lldb-dev]

Just to clarify a bit: what I wanted to say is that it's unlikely
that we will be able to ensure that bugzilla issue numbers after
migration would coincide with github issue numbers. And therefore
proper mapping will be necessary. And this mapping would be more
complex than just rewriting the URL.


On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:25 PM Anton Korobeynikov
 wrote:
>
> > Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are 
> > lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere 
> > in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx, and if we can preserve 
> > all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain substantially.
> Well... I hate to say this, but quite unlikely. Unfortunately, there
> were significant changes in GitHub opensource team and these days they
> are much less responsive than they used to be during our github
> migration. I asked this question several times, and unfortunately,
> there is no answer. I will certainly keep trying.
>
> The problem here is there is no way to assign / control issue numbers
> at all. They are just automatically assigned in sequential order.
> While it might be possible to utilize this while migrating everything
> to, say, a special archive project on GitHub, we will not be able to
> control the numbers assigned should we migrate the issues one-by-one
> or just move from archive to main project.
>
> So, the only viable way seems to be plain big mapping from bugzilla to
> github issue numbers without anything simple like "llvm.org/PRxx
> becomes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/xx";.
>
>
> --
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University



--
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Richard Smith via lldb-dev]

210 issues have been filed on github so far. That's negligible compared to
the total number we have, so a minor additional effort for those seems
acceptable if we can't actually clean them out and reuse the numbers.

So suppose we start with bugzilla issue #211 and migrate the issues to
github one at a time, in order. That would preserve the existing bug
numbering and all existing bugs, other than those first 210. For those 210,
I'd suggest we file new issues on github, and add comments to github issue
1-210 indicating they've been migrated and the new issue number. (I'd be
inclined to delete as much contents from those issues as possible and
retain only the redirect to the new number.)

Would that work?

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 13:33, Anton Korobeynikov via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> Just to clarify a bit: what I wanted to say is that it's unlikely
> that we will be able to ensure that bugzilla issue numbers after
> migration would coincide with github issue numbers. And therefore
> proper mapping will be necessary. And this mapping would be more
> complex than just rewriting the URL.
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:25 PM Anton Korobeynikov
>  wrote:
> >
> > > Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There
> are lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and
> elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx, and if we
> can preserve all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain
> substantially.
> > Well... I hate to say this, but quite unlikely. Unfortunately, there
> > were significant changes in GitHub opensource team and these days they
> > are much less responsive than they used to be during our github
> > migration. I asked this question several times, and unfortunately,
> > there is no answer. I will certainly keep trying.
> >
> > The problem here is there is no way to assign / control issue numbers
> > at all. They are just automatically assigned in sequential order.
> > While it might be possible to utilize this while migrating everything
> > to, say, a special archive project on GitHub, we will not be able to
> > control the numbers assigned should we migrate the issues one-by-one
> > or just move from archive to main project.
> >
> > So, the only viable way seems to be plain big mapping from bugzilla to
> > github issue numbers without anything simple like "llvm.org/PRxx
> > becomes https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/xx";.
> >
> >
> > --
> > With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> > Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
>
>
>
> --
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
> ___
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Anton Korobeynikov via lldb-dev]

> If we are reasonably certain that no one would be opening new issues on 
> GitHub while the migration is running...
And pull requests (the numbering is common for issues and pull
requests) as well. And we cannot disable pull requests at all. And I'm
afraid the issues will need to be opened as well during the migration.
And now the real problem: should an "extra" pull request or issue
intervene in the migration there is no way to "reset" the counter
besides deleting the project and creating it once again. We could only
sacrifice some bugzilla issues to restore the numbering...


-- 
With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Richard Smith via lldb-dev]

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 13:57, Anton Korobeynikov via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> > If we are reasonably certain that no one would be opening new issues on
> GitHub while the migration is running...
> And pull requests (the numbering is common for issues and pull
> requests) as well. And we cannot disable pull requests at all. And I'm
> afraid the issues will need to be opened as well during the migration.
> And now the real problem: should an "extra" pull request or issue
> intervene in the migration there is no way to "reset" the counter
> besides deleting the project and creating it once again. We could only
> sacrifice some bugzilla issues to restore the numbering...
>

We can edit summaries and comments, presumably by API calls as well as by
the web UI. So how about this:

Step 1: Preallocate sufficient github issue numbers. Make a bot account and
with it file empty placeholder issues until we have N issues total, where N
is the number of bugzilla bugs.
Step 2: Shut down the ability to file new bugzilla bugs, double-check we
have enough placeholder bugs, then open up github for new issue
submissions. Change llvm.org/PRx to redirect to github for x's
higher than the transition point.
Step 3a: For each issue filed by the bot account, sync that bug's contents
to the bugzilla entry: copy across the subject, all the comments, tags, and
so on.
Step 3b: For each issue not filed by the bot account whose number is that
of a bugzilla entry, file a new github bug and sync it with the bugzilla
bug then add a tracking comment to the github bug saying what the new
number is.

All we would need to do before we switch systems is steps 1 and 2. The data
import can be done incrementally with no time constraints. Once transition
is complete, we can change llvm.org/PRx (and existing bugzilla links,
since I'm sure they exist in the wild too) to redirect to github, and shut
down our bugzilla instance.

If new PRs are filed during step 1, we get new "problem" issue numbers,
which we deal with in the same way as the 210 existing github issue numbers.

-- 
> With best regards, Anton Korobeynikov
> Department of Statistical Modelling, Saint Petersburg State University
> ___
> cfe-dev mailing list
> cfe-...@lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[James Y Knight via lldb-dev]

In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the
bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" repository in
github. This has a few benefits:
1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process
run again, until we get a result we like.
2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
Once the bugs are migrated to *some* github repository, individual issues
can then be "moved" between repositories, and github will redirect from the
movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.

We could also just have llvm.org/PR### be the url only for legacy bugzilla
issue numbers -- and have it use a file listing the mappings of bugzilla id
-> github id to generate the redirects. (GCC just did this recently for svn
revision number redirections,
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).

Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev <
llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <
> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to
>> Github.
>> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the
>> proposal
>> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
>>
>> == Here is the original proposal:
>>
>> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
>>
>> == What has changed:
>>
>> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github
>> actions
>>   that will be used for this.
>>
>> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
>>
>> * We have the initial list of labels:
>> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
>>
>> == Remaining issue:
>>
>> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
>> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are some
>> options
>> that we have discussed:
>>
>> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla
>> that are
>> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means
>> that over
>> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs
>> are closed
>> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla
>> will be archived
>> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project
>> repo.
>>
>> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone
>> to
>> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the
>> llvm-project
>> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate
>> high-traffic
>> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility
>> of the bug.
>> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
>>
>> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub
>> issues at the same time.
>> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub
>> repository, and active bugs
>> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
>>
>
> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There are
> lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and elsewhere
> in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx, and if we can
> preserve all the issue numbers this would ease the transition pain
> substantially.
>
>
>> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be
>> archived from bugzilla
>> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that
>> we can migrate
>> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive
>> bugs during the
>> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely
>> several months)
>> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to
>> GitHub.
>>
>>
>> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns
>> raised on the list
>> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time
>> would
>> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and
>> hopefully we can
>> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tom
>>
>> ___
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org
>> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>>
> ___
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Fangrui Song via lldb-dev]

On 2020-04-20, Richard Smith via cfe-dev wrote:

On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 13:57, Anton Korobeynikov via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:


> If we are reasonably certain that no one would be opening new issues on
GitHub while the migration is running...
And pull requests (the numbering is common for issues and pull
requests) as well. And we cannot disable pull requests at all. And I'm
afraid the issues will need to be opened as well during the migration.
And now the real problem: should an "extra" pull request or issue
intervene in the migration there is no way to "reset" the counter
besides deleting the project and creating it once again. We could only
sacrifice some bugzilla issues to restore the numbering...



We can edit summaries and comments, presumably by API calls as well as by
the web UI. So how about this:

Step 1: Preallocate sufficient github issue numbers. Make a bot account and
with it file empty placeholder issues until we have N issues total, where N
is the number of bugzilla bugs.
Step 2: Shut down the ability to file new bugzilla bugs, double-check we
have enough placeholder bugs, then open up github for new issue
submissions. Change llvm.org/PRx to redirect to github for x's
higher than the transition point.
Step 3a: For each issue filed by the bot account, sync that bug's contents
to the bugzilla entry: copy across the subject, all the comments, tags, and
so on.
Step 3b: For each issue not filed by the bot account whose number is that
of a bugzilla entry, file a new github bug and sync it with the bugzilla
bug then add a tracking comment to the github bug saying what the new
number is.

All we would need to do before we switch systems is steps 1 and 2. The data
import can be done incrementally with no time constraints. Once transition
is complete, we can change llvm.org/PRx (and existing bugzilla links,
since I'm sure they exist in the wild too) to redirect to github, and shut
down our bugzilla instance.

If new PRs are filed during step 1, we get new "problem" issue numbers,
which we deal with in the same way as the 210 existing github issue numbers.


Not sure about the API throttling, ideally we can create a new
repository, write a script and allocate a github issue X for each
bugzilla issue X in some repository. We can then gradually copy comments
to that repository.

After contents are migrated, add a redirector llvm.org/PRx -> 
https://github.com/llvm/some-repository/issue/x
___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Tom Stellard via lldb-dev]

On 04/20/2020 09:15 PM, Mehdi AMINI wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> How is the user workflow to file bugs? Do we have some sort of template? Do 
> they have to pick a label?
> 

We don't have any templates defined yet, we need someone to volunteer to
do this.

Users would not be required to pick a label, they would either use a template
which would add the label automatically or pick a label they felt was relevant.

-Tom

> Thanks,
> 
> -- 
> Mehdi
> 
> 
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 12:30 PM Tom Stellard via llvm-dev 
> mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to 
> Github.
> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the 
> proposal
> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
> 
> == Here is the original proposal:
> 
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> 
> == What has changed:
> 
> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using github 
> actions
>   that will be used for this.
> 
> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
> 
> * We have the initial list of labels: 
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> 
> == Remaining issue:
> 
> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are some 
> options
> that we have discussed:
> 
> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla 
> that are
> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means 
> that over
> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as bugs 
> are closed
> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla 
> will be archived
> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the llvm-project 
> repo.
> 
> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow anyone 
> to
> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the 
> llvm-project
> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to migrate 
> high-traffic
> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the visibility 
> of the bug.
> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> 
> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub 
> issues at the same time.
> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub 
> repository, and active bugs
> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> 
> 
> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be 
> archived from bugzilla
> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means that 
> we can migrate
> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive 
> bugs during the
> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely 
> several months)
> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla to 
> GitHub.
> 
> 
> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some concerns 
> raised on the list
> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of time 
> would
> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion and 
> hopefully we can
> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> 
> ___
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-...@lists.llvm.org 
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 

___
lldb-dev mailing list
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev

Re: [lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] RFC: Switching from Bugzilla to Github Issues [UPDATED]

[Tom Stellard via lldb-dev]

On 04/20/2020 04:08 PM, James Y Knight wrote:
> In a previous discussion, one other suggestion had been to migrate all the 
> bugzilla bugs to a separate initially-private "bug archive" repository in 
> github. This has a few benefits:
> 1. If the migration is messed up, the repo can be deleted, and the process 
> run again, until we get a result we like.
> 2. The numbering can be fully-controlled.
> Once the bugs are migrated to /some/ github repository, individual issues can 
> then be "moved" between repositories, and github will redirect from the 
> movefrom-repository's bug to the target repository's bug.
> 

This seems like a good approach to me.

> We could also just have llvm.org/PR###  be the url 
> only for legacy bugzilla issue numbers -- and have it use a file listing the 
> mappings of bugzilla id -> github id to generate the redirects. (GCC just did 
> this recently for svn revision number redirections, 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2020-April/232030.html).
> 

Would we even need a mapping file for this if we are able to get bugzilla id N
to be archived to GitHub issue id N?

-Tom

> Then we could introduce a new naming scheme for github issue shortlinks.
> 
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 3:50 PM Richard Smith via llvm-dev 
> mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 12:31, Tom Stellard via llvm-dev 
> mailto:llvm-...@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I wanted to continue discussing the plan to migrate from Bugzilla to 
> Github.
> It was suggested that I start a new thread and give a summary of the 
> proposal
> and what has changed since it was originally proposed in October.
> 
> == Here is the original proposal:
> 
> http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2019-October/136162.html
> 
> == What has changed:
> 
> * You will be able to subscribe to notifications for a specific issue
>   labels.  We have a proof of concept notification system using 
> github actions
>   that will be used for this.
> 
> * Emails will be sent to llvm-bugs when issues are opened or closed.
> 
> * We have the initial list of labels: 
> https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/labels
> 
> == Remaining issue:
> 
> * There is one remaining issue that I don't feel we have consensus on,
> and that is what to do with bugs in the existing bugzilla.  Here are 
> some options
> that we have discussed:
> 
> 1. Switch to GitHub issues for new bugs only.  Bugs filed in bugzilla 
> that are
> still active will be updated there until they are closed.  This means 
> that over
> time the number of active bugs in bugzilla will slowly decrease as 
> bugs are closed
> out.  Then at some point in the future, all of the bugs from bugzilla 
> will be archived
> into their own GitHub repository that is separate from the 
> llvm-project repo.
> 
> 2. Same as 1, but also create a migration script that would allow 
> anyone to
> manually migrate an active bug from bugzilla to a GitHub issue in the 
> llvm-project
> repo.  The intention with this script is that it would be used to 
> migrate high-traffic
> or important bugs from bugzilla to GitHub to help increase the 
> visibility of the bug.
> This would not be used for mass migration of all the bugs.
> 
> 3. Do a mass bug migration from bugzilla to GitHub and enable GitHub 
> issues at the same time.
> Closed or inactive bugs would be archived into their own GitHub 
> repository, and active bugs
> would be migrated to the llvm-project repo.
> 
> 
> Can we preserve the existing bug numbers if we migrate this way? There 
> are lots of references to "PRx" in checked in LLVM artifacts and 
> elsewhere in the world, as well as links to llvm.org/PRx 
> , and if we can preserve all the issue numbers this 
> would ease the transition pain substantially.
>  
> 
> The key difference between proposal 1,2 and 3, is when bugs will be 
> archived from bugzilla
> to GitHub.  Delaying the archiving of bugs (proposals 1 and 2) means 
> that we can migrate
> to GitHub issues sooner (within 1-2 weeks), whereas trying to archive 
> bugs during the
> transition (proposal 3) will delay the transition for a while (likely 
> several months)
> while we evaluate the various solutions for moving bugs from bugzilla 
> to GitHub.
> 
> 
> The original proposal was to do 1 or 2, however there were some 
> concerns raised on the list
> that having 2 different places to search for bugs for some period of 
> time would
> be very inconvenient.  So, I would like to restart this discussion 
> and hopefully we can
> come to some kind of conclusion about the best way forward.
> 
> Thanks,
> Tom
> 
>