On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 17:49 -0400, 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. Well, so what? So a bunch of bug reports got filed, didn't lead to any changes, and then got closed. I mean, I guess looked at from a certain angle it's 'inefficient', but I don't think we're hitting any particular resource constraints in terms of Bugzilla use at this point. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
