On 04/24/2013 09:43 AM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 04/23/2013 03:27 PM, Richard Marko wrote: >> This allows us to get accurate statistics of crashing applications while >> not forcing every user to report to bugzilla. This is a trade-off >> between getting accurate statistics and quality of the reports as >> automated reports are anonymous which is also the reason why they can't >> contain full backtrace with data. > > To clarify, is it so that from now on we'll always get (less detailed) > "[faf]" bugzilla issues instead of the old (more detailed) "[abrt]" > ones, or does that depend on how the user experiencing a crash > interacts with ABRT? It depends on both the configuration and how the user interacts with ABRT. If there's a user who reports to bugzilla you'll get detailed report. If not, you'll only get report from faf when number of reports reaches certain threshold. We'll increase the threshold so there's higher chance of someone creating more detailed report. Even if you close these bugs with INSUFFICIENT DATA the server can point people there and they might provide required data. -- Richard Marko -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
