On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 19:54, Owen Taylor wrote: > On Sat, 2003-09-20 at 14:49, Owen Taylor wrote: > > It's worth noting that unless the bug is a crash where bug-buddy will > > get a backtrace of the crash, bugs filed directly are somewhat preferred > > over bug-buddy bugs. > > I should expand on this a bit: > > A) I'm really basing this on the bugs I see coming in for my packages, > not on the latest versions of bug-buddy. For all I know the > gnome-2.4 bug buddy produces so spiffy bugs that I don't know > people are using bug buddy. > > B) The problems that I've seen are: > > - bug buddy tends to produce bug reports that have a fair bit > of irrelevant text and information in them when you are more > confident about what the problem is. If you know it's > "File is mispelled Fle in version 2.4.1 of gnome-utils", then > the bug-buddy report will be annoying long. I can probably look at stripping that out in the bugzilla import. > - The bug-buddy bug report may not be properly associated with > your account on bugzilla.gnome.org, so things like mail > preference settings may not take effect. Does this really happen? If you've got an account when you file the bug, everything should Just Work (since bugzilla should associate it properly with your real account). > - It's possible to file bugs through bug buddy without providing > a legitimate email address. A bug report that you can't > provide extra information for when requested might as well not > have been filed. Yes. Of course, if you file with a valid e-mail address, this isn't an issue. I seem to remember that allowing anonymous bug reporting has been discussed before, and a lot of people (including me) don't want to raise the bar to involve e-mail authentication before filing a bug. -- Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part