bugzilla bugzappers?

Ralf Corsepius rc040203 at freenet.de
Mon Nov 8 14:49:04 UTC 2010


On 11/08/2010 01:34 PM, Jiri Moskovcak wrote:
> 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 ...
ABRT is your baby. You can't expect others doing your job.

Some food for you to think about:
- get rid of bugzilla accounts
- get rid of forcing users to fillup their systems with debuginfos.
- make the layout usable.
...

>> 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 ...
Ignoring the rudity of this part of your respone, debuginfo-install 
requires root. Remove the debuginfo-install stuff and what you say will 
become true.

>>     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?

... because a "simple computer user", will not understand what this 
"flash bulb" etc. is about, what debuginfos are, what a core dump is, 
has never heard about bugzilla, kerneloopes etc.

> maybe this comes from the
> wrong presumption that ABRT needs root...
No. It comes from you apparently being the father of ABRT and being too 
close to it.

Take a person, without a IT background and without Linux familarity, 
e.g. somebody whose computer usage basically is working with a handful 
of GUI apps (firefox, thunderbird, openoffice) and confront this person 
with a nautilus ARBT (without having him told in advance)

... watch for what will happen ...

>>     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...
correct ... WinXP hides those details "uneducated users" will not be 
able to understand.

 From an "uneducated user's POV" this is the easier to use alternative. 
 From an educated user's POV it's the worst of all possible solutions.

> - 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 ...
Again and again, I say: Critical serious and reproducable bugs have 
always been manually reported before ABRT was around. ABRT does not 
provide substantial benefits wrt. the qualtiy of Fedora and fixing 
"critical and serious" bugs.


>> However, I am experiencing missing debuginfos after debuginfo-install
>> even with what is supposed to be "uptodate" Fedora installations.
>>
>
> - not ABRT problem,,
Pardon - What? The foundations of your works are based on, are flawed 
and you are saying this is not your problem?

With all due respect, but you can't be serious.


More information about the devel mailing list