quality/tickets
11
4
Fork 0
Code Issues 62 Projects Activity Actions

Gather and submit Bugzilla replacement requirements #932

New issue
Closed
opened 2026-08-18 08:12:12 +00:00 by kparal · 7 comments
kparal commented 2026-08-18 08:12:12 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

See Planning and gathering requirements for future Red Hat BugZilla replacement.

We need to submit our requirements as well.

A lot of work has already been done in our Forgejo evaluation document. But it's definitely not complete, we should think about further use cases, requirements, impacts. It also targets Forgejo as the replacement and comparison point, while the current call to action doesn't specifically say that.

Let's either extend the wiki page, or create a separate document.

See [Planning and gathering requirements for future Red Hat BugZilla replacement](https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/LZMC3C6LDXEIEA42LJIPOHS3OPBSUKZZ/). We need to submit our requirements as well. A lot of work has already been done in our [Forgejo evaluation](https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Forgejo_evaluation) document. But it's definitely not complete, we should think about further use cases, requirements, impacts. It also targets Forgejo as the replacement and comparison point, while the current call to action doesn't specifically say that. Let's either extend the wiki page, or create a separate document.
kparal commented 2026-08-18 08:20:01 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Before I forget:

  • Bugzilla + Bodhi integration is extremely useful to us. We see which update fixes a particular bug, which is essential for tracking blocker and freeze exception fixes.
Before I forget: - Bugzilla + Bodhi integration is extremely useful to us. We see which update fixes a particular bug, which is essential for tracking blocker and freeze exception fixes.
kparal commented 2026-08-26 14:19:02 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

So suddenly this is critical priority, it must be submitted before Sep 1st.

https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/KTLYCSXBK5DFQJA7NQM6TMHGPBDTETXD/

So suddenly this is critical priority, it must be submitted before Sep 1st. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/KTLYCSXBK5DFQJA7NQM6TMHGPBDTETXD/
kparal self-assigned this 2026-08-26 14:19:16 +00:00
kparal commented 2026-08-26 14:42:48 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

I'll document my ideas here (and edit this reply when adding more stuff).

I'll document my ideas here (and edit this reply when adding more stuff). * Search across all issues (all components) https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/40 * Anonymous (no authentication) search. And also anonymous display of an individual issue. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/48 * Move an issue from one component to another, possibly multiple times. Alternatively assign an issue to multiple components. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/3 * Different bug states (e.g. Modified, On QA, Verified, etc, not just Open+Closed). Probably can be done with labels, if needed. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/12 * New bug reporting wizard (easy to use for newcomers). Product/component selection, searching in existing bugs (or least instructions on how to do it), etc. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/49 * Private issues/comments/attachments (hide sensitive logs, security reports, etc) https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/28 https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/29 https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/31 * Bodhi integration. Have a mapping between updates and bugs, so that we can search/track when there's an update fixing a particular bug (essential for blocker bug process). Bodhi automatically changing bug states and adding comments is also very useful. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/10 * API use https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/50 https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/20 * Bot accounts https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/51 * Member privileges. Quality members need to be able to adjust the state of all bugs (not just those that they created). It would be nice to all allow them to edit comment 0. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/46 * Blocks/Depends on relationships. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/4 * FAS integration https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/36 * Upstream reporting policy support. Some components (e.g. GNOME packages) already request the reporter to submit all actual bug reports (outside of Fedora-specific problems, packaging issues, etc) to be submitted to GNOME bug tracker instead of Fedora bug tracker. In Bugzilla, this is very clumsy. It would be good to have wizard or template that is configurable per-component and can provide specific instructions to the user. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/32 * External trackers list. Not a hard requirement, but extremely useful to QA. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/27 * Configurable restrictions on attachment upload. Some services only allow e.g. image or a zip file upload. We need various file types to be allowed to be uploaded, like text files without txt suffix (syslog), journal files, etc. Always zipping everything is a chore both for the reporter and the maintainer/developer. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/47
👍 1
churchyard commented 2026-08-27 07:05:06 +00:00
Copy link

I opened this ticket via the devel list email that mentioned it. And since I have already familiarized myself with the existing tickets in rhbz-replacement-requirements, I went through your list @kparal, and the only thing I believe was not covered:

The rest should already be there (but by all means, do your own analysis).

There is no wizard requirement, but there are templates and forms fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements#32

I opened this ticket via the devel list email that mentioned it. And since I have already familiarized myself with the existing tickets in rhbz-replacement-requirements, I went through your list @kparal, and the only thing I believe was not covered: - Anonymous access: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/48 - Member privileges: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/46 - Configurable restrictions on attachment upload: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/47 The rest should already be there (but by all means, do your own analysis). There is no wizard requirement, but there are templates and forms https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/32
❤️ 1
lruzicka commented 2026-08-27 11:12:56 +00:00
Owner
Copy link
  • searching in all issues should be possible via keywords, so anyone should be able to list issues reported by certain reporter, or assignee, or a subtext in the title. Possibly this should have a search form (not just an API call, although API call is better than nothing). fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements#40
  • moving tickets to different components should be not limited in any way if we want to go this way fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements#3
  • All functionality, we decide to have, must be possible using API calls, not just the front end. fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements#50 fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements#20
  • Upstream reporting policy support - ideally, this would be a sync tool to the upstream repositories, so that the ticket can be opened here, in Forgejo, and it will also open in upstream repos. The technical discussion can be continued in the upstream tracker and the Forgejo ticket can link to it. For many people, it is easier to open the bug in one generic tracker (Forgejo) than to follow a bunch of other trackers. [Kamil: I think this is not exactly a requirement, but instead a future improvement, not going to file it at this moment]
* searching in all issues should be possible via keywords, so anyone should be able to list issues reported by certain reporter, or assignee, or a subtext in the title. Possibly this should have a search form (not just an API call, although API call is better than nothing). https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/40 * moving tickets to different components should be not limited in any way if we want to go this way https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/3 * All functionality, we decide to have, must be possible using API calls, not just the front end. https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/50 https://forge.fedoraproject.org/fesco/rhbz-replacement-requirements/issues/20 * Upstream reporting policy support - ideally, this would be a sync tool to the upstream repositories, so that the ticket can be opened here, in Forgejo, and it will also open in upstream repos. The technical discussion can be continued in the upstream tracker and the Forgejo ticket can link to it. For many people, it is easier to open the bug in one generic tracker (Forgejo) than to follow a bunch of other trackers. [Kamil: I think this is not exactly a requirement, but instead a future improvement, not going to file it at this moment]
kparal commented 2026-08-27 14:39:14 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Thanks, Miro!

I've linked relevant tickets to all individual requirements, and filed a couple of new ones where it made sense to me. Everyone, please keep the ideas coming, the deadline is Sep 1st, so there's still time.

Thanks, Miro! I've linked relevant tickets to all individual requirements, and filed a couple of new ones where it made sense to me. Everyone, please keep the ideas coming, the deadline is Sep 1st, so there's still time.
kparal commented 2026-09-01 09:24:23 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

The deadline is over. I think we've submitted a number of useful suggestions.

I've given a thumbs up and subscribed to all requirements linked here. I encourage everyone to do the same.

Closing as done.

The deadline is over. I think we've submitted a number of useful suggestions. I've given a thumbs up and subscribed to all requirements linked here. I encourage everyone to do the same. Closing as done.
kparal 2026-09-01 09:24:24 +00:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag specified
Branches Tags
master
No results found.
Labels
Clear labels   
agile
related to Scrum or other Agile methodology

  
anacondawebui
tickets relating to the anaconda 'web ui' interface refresh

  
arm

   
blockerfe
Issues relating to the blocker / freeze exception process

  
Closed As
Duplicate
 Closed with the reason of Duplicate

  
Closed As
Fixed
 Closed with the reason of Fixed

  
Closed As
Invalid
 Closed with the reason of Invalid

  
Closed As
Wontfix
 Closed with the reason of Wontfix

  
Closed As
Worksforme
 Closed with the reason of Worksforme

  
coreos
issue related to coreos

  
criteria
release criteria-related issues

  
defect

   
easyfix

   
enhancement

   
iot
Issues related to IoT

  
meeting
a topic for the next QA meeting

  
meta
issues in the issue tracker itself (like, whooooaaa, man)

  
onboarding call
issues that are used to track new contributor onboarding

  
proventesters

   
retrospective
issues filed as a result of QA Retrospective feedback

  
silverblue
Issues related to silverblue

  
sponsor
requests to become a FAS group sponsor

  
test cases

   
test days

   
wiki
  
ai-review-please
Request AI review for a pull request

  
Backlog Status
Needs Review
 Work items that have been created or updated but need review, refinement, or approval before they can be considered ready for sprint planning.

  
Backlog Status
Ready
 Work items that have been reviewed, refined, and are ready to be committed to a sprint. These items have clear requirements and can be worked on immediately when capacity is available.

  
chore
Work that needs to be done but doesn't add new functionality or fix bugs. Maintenance tasks that keep the system running smoothly and the codebase clean.

  
documentation
Work focused on creating, updating, or improving documentation for users, developers, or system administrators.

  
points
01
 A task that is simple, small, and has very little uncertainty. It should be easy enough for any team member to pick up and complete quickly, without a lot of discussion or research.

  
points
02
 This is a task that is slightly more complex or larger than a "1." It might involve two or three simple steps, but the outcome is still very clear and there's little uncertainty.

  
points
03
 Medium-sized task with some noticeable complexity. It might require a bit more thought or collaboration. The steps are well-defined, but it's not a trivial change.

  
points
05
 A significant piece of work. It has more complexity and a higher degree of uncertainty than smaller tasks. It might require some research, a design discussion, or collaboration across multiple teams.

  
points
08
 Complex task with a lot of uncertainty. It's often the largest size that a team will consider for a single sprint. It likely requires a detailed breakdown and multiple team members to complete.

  
points
13
 Any task that feels like it's a "13" or more is considered an Epic. These are too large and uncertain to be worked on in a single sprint and should be broken down.

  
pr2jira
Sync this pull request to Jira for Agility tracking. Only use for PRs without a corresponding ticket.

  
Priority
Critical
 This is for work that is urgent and of critical importance and so and must be addressed immediately with a higher priority than all other work, even if not originally planned for the current sprint.

  
Priority
High
 This is for work that is critical and needs to be addressed in the next sprint. It's often for urgent bugs, important features, or a major piece of technical debt that is blocking other work.

  
Priority
Low
 This is for work that is good to do but not urgent. It's a candidate for being worked on when there's extra time or when it rises in importance. It can stay in the backlog for a longer period.

  
Priority
Medium
 This is for important work that should be done soon, but isn't as urgent as a high-priority item. It will likely be considered for the next 1-2 sprints.

  
Sprint Status
Blocked
 Work items that cannot progress due to external dependencies, blockers, or issues that need resolution.

  
Sprint Status
Done
 Work items that have been completed, reviewed, and integrated. No further work is needed within the current sprint.

  
Sprint Status
In Progress
 Work items currently being worked on by a team member. Active development, research, or implementation is happening.

  
Sprint Status
Review
 Work items that are complete but need review, testing, or approval before being marked as done.

  
Sprint Status
To Do
 Work items that are committed to the sprint but haven't been started yet. These items are ready to be picked up by team members.

  
Technical Debt
Work that addresses shortcuts, workarounds, or suboptimal implementations that were done previously to meet deadlines. These items improve code quality, maintainability, or performance without adding new features.

  
Work Item
Bug
 Issues where the system is not working as intended or designed. Bugs represent deviations from expected behavior.

  
Work Item
Epic
 Large initiatives that are broken down into multiple smaller work items (user stories, tasks, bugs). Epics represent significant features or projects that span multiple sprints.

  
Work Item
Spike
 Time-boxed research, investigation, or proof-of-concept work to reduce uncertainty or explore solutions. Spikes help inform future development decisions.

  
Work Item
Task
 Used to break down larger user stories into smaller, manageable implementation pieces. They focus on the specific technical steps needed to deliver the user story's value.

  
Work Item
User Story
 User-facing features or functionality that can be framed from a user perspective, describing what someone wants to accomplish and why.

No labels
agile
anacondawebui
arm
blockerfe
Closed As
Duplicate
Closed As
Fixed
Closed As
Invalid
Closed As
Wontfix
Closed As
Worksforme
coreos
criteria
defect
easyfix
enhancement
iot
meeting
meta
onboarding call
proventesters
retrospective
silverblue
sponsor
test cases
test days
wiki
ai-review-please
Backlog Status
Needs Review
Backlog Status
Ready
chore
documentation
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
pr2jira
Priority
Critical
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Sprint Status
Blocked
Sprint Status
Done
Sprint Status
In Progress
Sprint Status
Review
Sprint Status
To Do
Technical Debt
Work Item
Bug
Work Item
Epic
Work Item
Spike
Work Item
Task
Work Item
User Story
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Sprint 14
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
kparal
lruzicka
3 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Blocks
#5 Bugzilla replacement investigation
cle/tickets
Reference
quality/tickets#932
No description provided.