abrt thoughts pre-rfe q?

[Matt McCutchen]

On Sun, 2010-08-08 at 09:24 +0100, Frank Murphy wrote:
> On 08/08/10 03:25, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> <snip>
> >>
> >> Would it be any benefit to the maintainers\bugzappers.
> >> If abrt opened the existing link, before it would report?
> >
> > And then what?  Encourage the user not to add a comment unless they have
> > new information?  If that is the proposal, I am in favor.
> >
> Yes that was the hope.
> But the main idea, was to get them to read the existing info.

Users should already be reading the existing information, because abrt
provides the link after it makes its changes (adding the user to CC and
adding a comment with the "how to reproduce" text, if it was nonempty).
The proposal would just be to reverse the order of the steps so that
users can, and hopefully will, avoid adding redundant comments.

> >> So there wouldn't need be be so many replies of
> >> please try xyz?, to help cut down on noise.
> >
> > I don't understand this part.  The noise I've seen consists of
> > abrt-added "me-too" comments with steps to reproduce.  I have never seen
> > someone repost the same workaround in response to such a comment.
> >
> By that I mean the maintainer\Co-Maintainer\Good Citizen
> retelling the same fix\workaround posted earlier in the bug.
> To either enable\updates-testing or do xyz.
> Because the bug report hasn't been read by the "added to" person.

As I said, I have never seen that happen.  Do you have an example?

-- 
Matt