Re: bug-buddy was branched silently some time ago

[Christian Kirbach <christian kirbach googlemail com>]

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 13:53:12 +0100, Fernando Herrera  
<fherrera onirica com> wrote:

> On 11/28/06, Andre Klapper <ak-47 gmx net> wrote:
> > more reports, which either means that the bugsquad needs more volunteer
> > triagers, or that we need more automation.
I'd say we require some automation here. I started work on some kind of  
"exact-dup-finder" that could be of use
to bugsquad and bug-buddy. Due to time and skill constraints I did no make  
any progress yet.


> > we can reject duplicates and tell the user about this (okay - we can do
> > this already by pretending that the user has filed the original bug
> > report[1], but this is more a hack than a solution).
it is an unclean (my diplomatic term for dirty) solution. There is no  
feedback to the
user except that the crash report has been 'accepted'. There really should  
be a message displayed
that it has been reported before, and preferrably some information on the  
progress (e.g. problem
is not confirmed yet, problem has been fixed and will be gone with the  
next update)


> 1) Warn the user that its software is 1 year old and should update
> 2) Don't allow the user to send the report if he is using 1 year old
> distribution
Recall that there are distributions with long upgrade cycles like Debian.
Users of these simply may not be able to upgrade at all.

> 3) Check distribution version/release; if there are updates out there
> don't allow to send if/ask for upgrade
Some list could be manually maintained and checked by bug-buddy for this  
purpose.

> 4) Same as 3, but at package level
The best way to do this is probably by using the package management system  
provided by the
distribution.


--
Christian Kirbach
Christian Kirbach siemens com
+49 176 23861781