On Monday 13 May 2013 11:26 PM, Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 05/13/2013 03:06 PM, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: >> > 1) Duplicate bug reports: There are high possibilities that we could see >> > a sudden increase in the number of bug reports, many duplicates. This is >> > something I'm not sure how we want to evaluate. We could give apport a >> > try, and leave it to the users to be more conscious when hitting submit. > I think that Apport is a very good idea, though I really wouldn't like > to receive so many duplicates. I had experience it with one of my > package in Ubuntu, and it was quite annoying. > > Maybe it would be possible to fix that at the BTS level, if it sees > some kind of tags from Apport? (just trowing an idea... not sure if > it is doable / desirable). Perhaps with a way to inform the BTS that > we don't want to receive emails from Apport, rather than having to > upload a new version of the package to do so? That would be IMO > better, because it would be not realistic to upload just for that > reason in the stable release. > That is a good point. Thanks Thomas. We could submit apport reports with the tag "Apport" and instruct reportbug to forward the report to "package@qa.debian.org". This way we avoid the flood of bug reports in general while at the same time the concerned parties are kept aware. What do other folks think? Will this model work? I know not every package has the debug symbols generated, but that item doesn't have a time line. And besides, the report can still be useful for some. > I would still consider it very valuable to receive such bug reports, > even with many duplicates. -- Given the large number of mailing lists I follow, I request you to CC me in replies for quicker response
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature