On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:16:36AM -0800, mathog wrote:
> On 05-Feb-2016 05:40, Eduard Braun wrote:
> > In general I would avoid splitting the code repository from the bug
> > tracker as those two are closely related and often intertwined. It
> > hinders efficiency a lot when tracking bugs elsewhere.
>
> I agree with that - everything in one place.  Moving to git is fine so
> long as the entire history of the project makes the transition, all the
> bugs, all the revisions, and so forth.  There shouldn't be anything
> "left behind" on launchpad.  Not that I have any idea how one would go
> about doing this sort of migration, never having used git except to
> download entire projects for a local build.

The git repository itself should be straightforward.  I've done bzr ->
git on a bunch of trees without any trouble.  I've not attempted on
Inkscape itself, but others have already reported they've experimented
and it went straightforward.

Bugs I think will be much harder to transition.  There is no
standardized storage for bugs like there is with git, and not really any
established data spec, so unless a target site advertises a specific
"Launchpad bug import" function, it's going to be a fair bit of work to
write a converter.

Launchpad's data sources have an API so exporting the bugs should not be
a problem technically, just a lot of python coding.  Whatever we would
move them to would obviously need an import API (and ideally an export
API in case we decide to change providers down the road!)  So if we want
to keep things together, we would HAVE to have someone own this coding
project.  (Unless someone knows of an existing converter tool?)