On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote: > On 11/04/2010 10:49 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote: >>> 2010/11/4 Orcan Ogetbil : >>>> Maybe it is time to discuss the usefulness of ABRT to Fedora. I think >>>> that it is a great idea for commercial products such as RHEL, but it >>>> obviously did not fit Fedora as is. >>> >>> No need to discuss - it's really useful. I recently closed several >>> issues with the aid of stacktaces sent by ABRT. >> >> I am very happy that the current scheme works well for you. You think >> that we should ignore the outstanding 93% of the ABRT bug reports, and >> the 6000 untouched bugs that will be closed in a month. If we don't do >> anything that 6000 will multiply at the end of the F-13 cycle. >> >> The current scheme did not fit the majority of maintainers.This is >> obvious. The numbers just prove it. Moreover, it drives users away >> from reporting bugs and drives at least 1 maintainer away from >> maintaining certain packages. >> >> Instead of saying "no need to discuss, it works for me", let us try to >> improve this process. Going in circular arguments will not help us. >> >> Orcan > > Obviously we *need* to discuss, but just complaining won't help anything > - if you think ABRT is not providing a good info for you packages, then > please write me an email how to improve it (which data you'd like to see > for specific packages) and we can sure do something about that and > disable it in a meanwhile to relieve you from those useless bug reports. > Sure, here are the things that I need. 1- For my packages, I don't want any ABRT bug reports without the "Steps to reproduce" information. ABRT should tell the user the field is missing and it won't send a bug report until the user fills it. Some maintainers say they don't need the "Steps to reproduce", but I need it. 2- ABRT should keep track of unresponsive users. If a user has an outstanding "needinfo?" flag for the bugs sent through ABRT, he shouldn't be able to send a new bug report through ABRT for my packages. 3- Ability to turn off ABRT for certain packages. Whenever I provide an application package with no nonstandard patches and there is a crash, it is most definitely not my fault. The user should be instructed to take the backtrace upstream to the URL of the package and report it in their bug tracker/mailing list. Even better, ABRT can file the bug directly upstream. I am willing to provide the information of upstream bug trackers/mailing lists for all of my packages. Thanks for your understanding, Orcan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
