On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 11:20:18 -0400 Colin Walters wrote: > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:12 AM, Thomas Spura > <tomspur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Without a clear way "how to reproduce" it, they can't help here > > One advantage of automated collection (or semi-automated like ABRT) is > that given enough crashes, it can be easier to track down the root > cause. So it's useful to have the report logged, even if we can't > take immediate action on it. > > > So some upstream author would help, but what in the cases, they > > don't/can't? > > Then keep it around until it becomes useful. > > > Ignoring the bugs till the release is EOL is not really an option... > > So for the reasons above there's no problem with leaving the report in > the system. Remember also that a certain percentage of crashes are > going to happen simply due to bad hardware. We have to accept noise > in the system. Crashes aren't bugs; they're crashes that may be bugs. Ok, makes sense. I'll CC'ing you the next time, when such a crash happens (and I suspect pygobject to do something wrong) and not completely reassign it. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
