On Sun, 2011-08-07 at 22:46 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote: > On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 a 07:17:52AM +0200, Rick Spencer wrote: > > On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 15:46 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote: > > > > > > > > <side comment> I think we are doing it wrong: we should collect > > > > crashes on all supported releases. </side comment> > > > > > > I agree. As designed, apport files a new bug report for each crash, > > > which can quickly lead to excessive numbers of dupe bug reports (there > > > are ways of making apport auto-dupe, but this takes effort to set up and > > > isn't always 100% reliable). This can quickly become unmanageable > > > especially for packages that lack someone to keep an eye on the bug > > > reports. > > > > > > In any case, these types of reports post-release are most useful in > > > aggregate rather than as individual bug reports. If they were filed in > > > some ultra simple crash database (with no signup required of the user) > > > we could get most of the value without incurring a lot of extra bug > > > labor. > > Has this very thing not been proposed? We should discuss doing this for > > 12.04. > > It's been propsed and discussed previously, like ScottK mentioned. The > issue has been finding someone with time to work on it.
I know it's been proposed and discussed previously, and I believe Robert Collins both wants something similar for Launchpad and has done some work towards making it happen. I don't know if we've actually written down what we want out of a crash database, though. Do we have a requirements document for one? If the Launchpad team wanted to devote some time to adding a crash database do they know what we want out of such a beast? Is there a LEP for a crash database? If not, perhaps we could gather requirements in this thread and then write one? Chris
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
