Re: GnomeClient replacement?

["Luis Villa" <luis tieguy org>]

(Sigh. This will teach me to send emails at 3am. Luckily in a week
you're all rid of me for several years ;)

On 7/19/06, Sebastien Bacher <seb128 debian org> wrote:
> On mer, 2006-07-19 at 03:28 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
>
> > * distros are all crap at getting their bugs upstream, pretty much.
> > (Some are slightly better than others, at various times.)
>
> I though we were doing a pretty good job at forwarding Ubuntu bugs
> upstream, but apparently it looks like you don't appreciate the efforts,
> makes me wonder if we should bother keeping doing that then

Ubuntu does better than anyone has done it since... well, a long time,
at any rate. And by Ubuntu I mostly mean *you*, which makes me worry
about burnout, sustainability, etc., but that's a different
discussion, probably.

> > So... stack traces going to distros instead of bugzilla ~= nigh-unusable GNOME.
>
> There you assume than distros don't send back useful informations
> upstream and than distros are doing no QA. What we are trying to do with
> bugs about the Ubuntu desktop is to get something useful before
> forwarding them upstream. I would have no issue to just dump hundred of
> useless bugs and non-debug backtraces upstream and stop trying getting
> details for them if you think that would be better

No, of course not. But most distros don't do either the filtering *or*
the upstreaming, and given the choice between unfiltered traces or
none at all, we must choose unfiltered. Obviously filtered is
preferred, and you're right to point out that Ubuntu has done better
than most on this score. I'd love to see all the distros actively
competing on this point, really :)

Ideally, FWIW, I'd actually like to see the work on filtering done in
bugzilla.g.o- that gives a broader pool of volunteers, and a broader
pool of duplication information- if Ubuntu filters before it gets to
b.g.o, then there are good odds the same filtering is going on over at
fedora, and at novell as well- if the filtering and collaboration
takes place at the gnome level, the duplication can be reduced.

> > complete stack trace data. But in the current situation (distros don't
> > have the tools to create the better stack traces, and don't have the
>
> Luis, have you read the Ubuntu spec pointed by Ben? A part of it is
> about getting better backtraces, Martin Pitt already did some good work
> on it and it's likely we will get automatic debug backtraces when
> something crash for Ubuntu edgy

Several distros have discussed it, and I'm glad someone is going ahead
and implementing. You'll forgive me for getting too excited until I
see it actually working, as the first proposal I saw for something
like this was in 2001 :)

Again, I'm sorry I offended- the different distros have different
success levels here, and obviously over the past 12-24 months Ubuntu
has been pretty much a model. I think there is still a lot to be done,
though, especially in automation and filtering, for all parties.

Luis