James Mckenzie wrote: > > I agree. The appdb should have enough intelligence to figure out when a duplicate report is submitted through this method. We don't have enough folks to triage bugs if this were the case. > In the case of a crash, the backtrack could be used as a sort of signature to spot duplicate reports. This in connection with context information (system, registry, wine specific config, hardware) could be fed into a database for pattern matching/extraction. Not exactly a minor task, but I guess there is already stuff out there that could be reused, and could make an interesting student project (or Google Summer of Code). > > > > At least, the crashes should not be silent: a dialog box with some explanation, a text box where > > to copy output info from (alternatively show how to use terminal), point people to this forum. > > > > That might make people upset. However, they will have a place to send in reports. > I don't follow this one. A silent crash is annoying for everyone, no? I don't think there is a need to have to go to a browser to, open forums page, register if not yet done, etc.. Ideally, this could be done directly from "wine crash assistant". And while the user is typing in information, a search could be done on the background to retrieve forum entries and/or appdb entries. Yeah, I know, ideas are cheap :-) > > > > Make a bridge between appdb and wine, so that when a certain app crashes, an howto could be > > displayed, and/or a link to the appdb page is provided. > > > > This is a good thought, but what happens when the application is not in the AppDB? Users are trying to use new programs all the time. Should we allow them to create a new entry and provide input? These are items for discussion. > Sure, anyone can already create an entry. I think the only issue here is the registration, but I suppose this could be done in a single step (register+and create entry). Ideally, registration information would be kept in th user's wine registry? Actually, this could also be defined with winecfg.
