awilliam at redhat.com
Fri Nov 5 19:20:26 UTC 2010
On Thu, 2010-11-04 at 17:49 -0400, Orcan Ogetbil wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:51 AM, Peter Lemenkov wrote:
> > 2010/11/4 Orcan Ogetbil :
> >> Maybe it is time to discuss the usefulness of ABRT to Fedora. I think
> >> that it is a great idea for commercial products such as RHEL, but it
> >> obviously did not fit Fedora as is.
> > No need to discuss - it's really useful. I recently closed several
> > issues with the aid of stacktaces sent by ABRT.
> I am very happy that the current scheme works well for you. You think
> that we should ignore the outstanding 93% of the ABRT bug reports, and
> the 6000 untouched bugs that will be closed in a month. If we don't do
> anything that 6000 will multiply at the end of the F-13 cycle.
Well, so what? So a bunch of bug reports got filed, didn't lead to any
changes, and then got closed. I mean, I guess looked at from a certain
angle it's 'inefficient', but I don't think we're hitting any particular
resource constraints in terms of Bugzilla use at this point.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
More information about the devel