bugzilla bugzappers?

[Jiri Moskovcak]

On 11/06/2010 02:53 AM, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On 11/05/2010 09:46 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote:
>> On Fri, 05 Nov 2010 17:56:51 +0100, Ralf wrote:
>>
>>> ABRT
>>
>>> It doesn't tell the user that core dumps without reproducer are
>>> worthless in most cases but blindly sends out reports
>>
>> Parts of the Fedora user base "abuse" ABRT in that they refuse to
>> fill in the empty fields. Blame the reporters not the tool.
> A matter of point of view: To me this is an ABRT GUI issue. It currently
> doesn't suck as much as it did before, nevertheless its usability still
> leaves much to be desired.
>

- please, send me some ideas or mockups and I will be more than happy to 
change the GUI... but just complaining "it sucks" doesn't give me much 
information what to fix ...

> As yourself:
> What would you do if you were a "simple computer user" and are facing
> this "flash bulb icon" asking you to become "root"

- this is not true, you don't need a root for user crashes, so please 
don't lie ...

> and to get a bugzilla
> account?

- yes, that's unfortunate, but what would be the solution here? allowing 
some anonymous account will lead to even worse situation...

>
>    You'd call your sys-admin, who'll deinstall or deactivate ABRT pretty
> soon, when you call him for the "Nth time".

- don't understand, why would you call admin? maybe this comes from the 
wrong presumption that ABRT needs root...

>    As a user you'd also think "what kind of crap is this Fedora/Linux -
> the WinXP I have at home is better".
>

- hm, wxp bug reporting is nice, because end-users can't even see where 
the bug went and check it's progress... if someone thinks it's better 
then...then I won't try to argue with him...

>> It's too
>> easy for such people to open tickets via ABRT and then ignore
>> a maintainer's NEEDINFO request.
> Correct - But the same applies to maintainers.
>
> My experience is, most of them ignore ABRT reports, probably because
> the ABRT reports are not helpful to them and/or don't contain sufficient
> infos.
>

- again and again and again - We know ABRT is not able to provide a good 
debug informations for every application we have, but the solution is 
not ignoring the bugs, but send us email or create a RFE in bugzilla 
describing what additional info you'd like and how/where to get it ...

>> It's disheartening in some cases, but
>> it's a people-problem not a tool-problem.
> I disagree - IMO; ABRT is not end-user ready. It presumes end-users
> to be familiar with redhat's infrastructure, which is a developer
> infrastructure and them to be interested to get involved into Fedora
> development. This simply does not apply.
>
>>> Also, this produces incomplete traceback in many (IMO all) cases.
>>
>> Cannot confirm that.
>
> In almost all cases, I am observing missting debuginfos even after
> executing debuginfo-installs.
>
>   >  There seem to be some issues with not finding the
>> needed debuginfo packages, which may be related to frequent updates of
>> repos and older packages getting pruned. It may also be related to users
>> updating their boxes at strange times, e.g. seldomly but immediately after
>> a crash.
>
> Possible. This certainly this applies in some cases.
>
> However, I am experiencing missing debuginfos after debuginfo-install
> even with what is supposed to be "uptodate" Fedora installations.
>

- not ABRT problem,, but there are some projects trying to deal with 
this which I mentioned in one of my previous emails.. (debuginfofs and 
retrace server)

> Ralf