On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 09:04 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Wed, 2008-07-23 at 08:34 +0200, Joel Andres Granados wrote: > > Looking at this I can see the possibility of having a bug with a lot of comments in it. > > Like the Samsung bug that everybody hit. I'm not for changing it, I'm just saying that it > > might be something to consider if we are getting bugs with an unmanageable list of tracebacks. > > It's a toss-up as to whether we're better off with multiple tracebacks > (and thus more data which could be helpful) or just the original one. I > lean slightly towards more data at the moment, although I could change > my mind once it's actually running :-) Since we're pulling the whiteboard anyway, anaconda could check for a "no more tracebacks needed" flag in the whiteboard and only add a comment if that flag is not present. That way, we could manually cap a bug if it starts to get out of hand.. -w
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
