On 05/15/2015 03:35 PM, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Fri, 2015-05-15 at 08:47 -0400, Bastien Nocera wrote:
> As far as GNOME is concerned, the ABRT setting is deprecated.
Well it's obviously unacceptable to have two different settings for the
same thing, one of which supercedes the other.
Tangentially related: to be blunt, I have no confidence that the ABRT
developers can get the GUI into shape in any reasonable timespan (next
2-3 years) and I'd prefer for us to not ship the GUI at all.
Sure. It's rocket science to make a GUI according to Gnome HIG, cause it
shouldn't have any buttons or features. 2-3 years? I can and I will
write an Qt app for ABRT in 2-3 days when our DBus API stabilizes.
I'm wondering what according to you is "in shape" as in my experience
most Gnome apps went downhill in terms of usability, features and
overall look.
Automatic
reporting to the retrace server should suffice for us.
Retrace server is something different and there's no reporting to
retrace server - retrace server (surprise) does retracing of core dumps
to generate micro reports sent to faf.
https://abrt.readthedocs.org/en/latest/howitworks.html
Even that comes
at tremendous cost: out-of-the-box coredumpctl. coredumpctl is an
amazing feature for developers (and why I do not use ABRT) and it's a
shame that ABRT disables it.
If you ever talked to ABRT developers about these sort of things you
would know that there's integration ongoing to use tooling that systemd
provides (both coredump hook & journald) so it would be possible to use
coredumpctl and abrt alongside.
By tremendous cost you mean you can't use fancy coredumpctl gdb command
but with little effort you can write a simple wrapper around abrt-cli
that does the very same thing. I agree abrt-cli is not the most usable
or intuitive tool but I haven't seen an RFE from you about its missing
features. So why you are bashing our project instead of trying to be
constructive?
--
Richard
irc: impure_hate