Re: random thought about bug-buddy (in the 'very long term thinking' category)

[hobbit aloss ukuu org uk]

On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 09:54:07PM -0400 or thereabouts, Luis Villa wrote:
> So, this has a /bit/ to do with 1.4 support and such, but also just with
> long-term planning. Would anyone object if future versions of bug-buddy
> 'expired' a year after being built? Like, run the binary, it checks the
> date, if date is greater than one year after being built, it refuses to
> run.

Yeah. Cos I am lazy and sometimes point it at a core file from
a non-GNOME app just to avoid trying to remember how to use gdb :) 

(I don't send them to Gnome bugzilla then: I save them to /tmp and 
edit the file to get just the stacktrace out of it, before doing
whatever else I'm up to.)

> I do this because we still get reports from GNOME1.2, among other
> things- basically all old, useless crash reports. So I'm thinking that
> very old GNOME installations should have the ability to report crashes
> disabled. Pop up a nice little 'your GNOME installation is over a year
> old. Please upgrade to a newer version of GNOME. If you still wish to
> report a bug against your current version, please go to
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/' dialog instead of bug-buddy.

I would rather: "You are about to submit a bug report on software
which is over a year old. Please reconsider whether this is a good
idea" with "Discard report" as the button with the focus on it,
and the option to send it still there.

I think it would be more useful to check how old the app being
bug-reported against was rather than how old the bug-buddy is, too.

Will try to read rest of thread before replying further though!

Telsa