Re: Bugzilla: Reducing bugspam and finding patches

[Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org>]

On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 08:13:28AM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 00:39 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> 
> > 3. Already fixed (duplicate)
> >    Some crashers have been fixed a long time ago, but they still receive
> >    daily bugreports. These bugreports can now be rejected automatically.
> >    For this the first 5 functions of the stacktrace are used, coupled
> >    with the GNOME version (to prevent regressions being rejected).
> 
> 	This one worries me a little - e.g. look at one of the panel crashers:
> 
> 150809 /GNOME2\.8\./ gtk_widget_set_sensitive g_cclosure_marshal_VOID__POINTER g_closure_invoke g_signal_has_handler_pending g_signal_emit_valist gnome-panel

This one was added by one of the other gnome-panel maintainers, Vincent
Untz. It could certainly match multiple crashers, but it is specific for
gnome-panel in GNOME2.8 (the stacktrace is limited to gnome-panel bugs). 

> 	Its certainly conceivable that we introduce some new crasher with that
> signature. I guess, though, that since we're only matching against GNOME
> 2.8 bugs, its less of a worry.
> 
> 	I wonder would it be better to leave these bug reports through and
> automatically mark them as duplicates ... that way its always in the
> database for someone to find later.

I thought of that, but I do not believe someone will search for these.
A stacktrace should only be added if it is specific to that bug and
GNOME version. Exception is that gnome-panel one.

I do receive a copy of all bug-buddy emails (including all rejections +
spam messages).

In the near future I want to make this for open bugs as well. For those
I haven't decided if either a comment should be added to the original
bug, or to create a new bug and dupe it right away.

-- 
Regards,
Olav