On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 10:49:29 -0400 Colin Walters wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 6:06 AM, Thomas Spura > <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 11:01:36 -0400 > > Colin Walters wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> I'd like to propose a general rule that ABRT crash logs should > >> remain "assigned" to the actual application, unless an actual > >> investigation has been done and there's a "reasonable" certainty > >> the flaw is in the library code in which it happened to crash. > > > > Who should do that investigation, when the maintainer of the actual > > application is unable to do so? A bug tracker with > > FE-NEEDSHELPWITHBACKTRACE would help here. Maybe FES [1] would like > > to help here in that case. > > Try the upstream author first? Without a clear way "how to reproduce" it, they can't help here (that was the answer in some other bugs of pychess). The python-visual authors even said, that they never saw a backtrace and can't help at all. So some upstream author would help, but what in the cases, they don't/can't? Ignoring the bugs till the release is EOL is not really an option... -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
