bugzilla bugzappers?

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 11/04/2010 10:22 PM, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> 2-  ABRT should keep track of unresponsive users. If a user has an
> outstanding "needinfo?" flag for the bugs sent through ABRT, he
> shouldn't be able to send a new bug report through ABRT for my
> packages.
>

Since this has turned into general pony request to the ABRT I shall 
throw in one for the reporters

On behalf of all reporters that have never received a response from a 
maintainer on a component they have reported against I not only ask the 
ABRT maintainers to block any reports against those component that a 
maintainer has not responded but I also request that those components 
get removed from bugzilla.redhat.com.

> 3- Ability to turn off ABRT for certain packages. Whenever I provide
> an application package with no nonstandard patches and there is a
> crash, it is most definitely not my fault. The user should be
> instructed to take the backtrace upstream to the URL of the package
> and report it in their bug tracker/mailing list. Even better, ABRT can
> file the bug directly upstream. I am willing to provide the
> information of upstream bug trackers/mailing lists for all of my
> packages.


This confusion has been going on for enough of release cycles already 
and I think it's time for FPC to step in and clarify what are the 
maintainers/packagers responsibility towards the Fedora community and 
it's user base to avoid any further rifts between QA members and 
maintainers.

Either reporters report directly upstream always or to our own bug 
tracking system which one is it?

JBG