On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Tomas Mraz <tmraz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 18:53:17 <ajax> i've heard a modest amount of complaints that abrt is doing more harm than good >> 18:53:53 <ajax> along multiple axes, but in particular it's simply too much data for apps like firefox and evo for maintainers to respond to >> 18:54:22 <ajax> i don't have any particular suggestions for this (well, i do, but i'll be politic), but it's something i'd like to see discussed from the distro planning POV >> 18:54:44 <nirik> yeah, came up on the list recently again as well. >> 18:55:11 <vinzv> hi >> 18:56:15 <ajax> is this something people want to talk about here next week, or should it be more of a fedora-devel issue >> 18:56:38 <nirik> I did note that totem and rhythumbox (I can't spell that to save my life) have the vast majority of bastens bugs. >> 18:57:23 <nirik> I wonder if we could get abrt to have a maintainer opt out thing that would be easy to change by maintainers? >> 18:57:35 <nirik> right now it's blacklist is in the package itself. >> 18:58:18 <nirik> or if we could have them file in another place. ;( > > ABRT already looks up for the duplicate backtraces. Wouldn't it be the > easiest way to add some special keyword such as "abrtcatchall" or > something and if ABRT found an non-CLOSED bug with this keyword it would > append a new backtrace to the bug instead of opening a new one. This > should be fairly simple to implement. Of course ABRT would not append a > duplicate backtrace that is already added to the bug. > Well ABRT should stop filing bugs in bugzilla, it does not scale PERIOD. A better solution to have some server that collects the data and provides access to the traces on per package basis. Possible with similar sorting algorithms as used in kerneloops.org . So a developer sees "oh many people are hitting this crash lets look at it" instead of "too many bug spam I'll just ignore it". -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
