On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 07:11 -0500, Michael Catanzaro wrote:
On Wed, 2014-07-16 at 10:59 +0200, Jiri Eischmann wrote:
> ad 2) This is not slow at all. ureports are created and uploaded
Thanks for bringing up the distinction here, by the way -- it's only
reporting to Bugzilla that is so horribly broken. (I'm with Elrad -- I
don't understand how people manage to complete the process nowadays.)
I've never had any problem with the automatic reports, which are
unobtrusive and always quick. The GUI claims that such crashes are "not
reported" even after ABRT displays a notification to say it has been
automatically reported, which is not OK, but that's a GUI problem.
What do you think about asking the ABRT devs to move the GUI to a
subpackage that we will not install by default, so the user never sees
anything besides notifications unless he installs the package manually?
I'm of two minds on this.
I agree that the retrace server with its automatically collected
statistics is valuable. Imo, that is the one 'winner' that the abrt
effort has produced. It would be great to focus on that part of the
project, develop it more actively, and advertise it more so that it
becomes part of the regular Fedora development culture - From my own
experience, I look at it maybe every other month, and try to track down
some crashes. It is not something I have constantly on my radar. Maybe
it is different for others ?
But the client-side of abrt is so prone to quality of implementation
issues that I might agree that it would be best to remove it and start
over. Just the other day, I leisurely installed eclipse during a
'developer experience' presentation, only to find my laptop unresponsive
after the meeting. Turns out abrt-java was eating my system :-(.