ABRT frustrating for users and developers

[David Tardon]

On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 11:11:25AM +0100, Radek Vokal wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Caolán McNamara <caolanm at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2010-01-16 at 16:01 +0100, Christoph Wickert wrote:
> >> I know that APRT is still very young technology, but after 2 months it's
> >> time for a interim conclusion. For me the conclusions are:
> >
> > Abrt's getting a bit of a knocking in this thread, but I'm fairly happy
> > with it myself, it's doing its job fairly well, and I prefer it over
> > having no abrt. Its not abrt's fault that the crashes are happening :-)
> >
> > I'd definitely prefer that abrts went to a separate abrt-tracker where
> > maintainers could sample the top X crashes for their apps rather than
> > getting a bugzilla bug for each one.
> >
> > And I'd definitely prefer if the UI encouraged more verbose user input,
> > e.g. start off the user with some sample text that says "At the time of
> > the crash I was...." or something like that. Or a "help" link that sends
> > them to see some successful examples.
> >
> > There are various things I'd like to see in the bug-report which abrt
> > can't/doesn't give due to various concerns, but adding them in abrt-gui
> > might be generally "close enough", e.g. GNOME vs KDE, gtk theme, X video
> > driver in use, screen depth, whether a11y is enabled or not, which java
> > alternative is active.
> 
> An ABRT can easily provide that. It supports application specific
> plugins where maintainer can specify conf files or other info that the
> report should provide. Talk to Jiri or check fedorahosted.org/abrt for
> more info.

AFAIK both pkg-specific scripts (RunApp) and plugins are run from the
daemon (they certainly were when I tried it last time). Unfortunately,
we'd like to get informations from user session...

D.