<p>Am 11.03.2012 17:34 schrieb "Steven Sroka" <<a href="mailto:sroka.steven@gmail.com">sroka.steven@gmail.com</a>>:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 2012-03-11, at 10:21 AM, Milian Wolff wrote:<br>
><br>
> > On Sunday 11 March 2012 11:26:53 Niko Sams wrote:<br>
> >> Hi,<br>
> >><br>
> >> I'd like to talk about an idea on how DrKonqi (which is a really<br>
> >> useful thing btw) could be<br>
> >> further improved.<br>
> >> In short: DrKonqi shouldn't create bugs directly but talk to a "layer"<br>
> >> between.<br>
> >><br>
> >> DrKonqi -> <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> -> <a href="http://bugs.kde.org">bugs.kde.org</a><br>
> >><br>
> >> <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> is a new web application - a bit similar to bugzilla:<br>
> >> - lists all reported crashes with intelligent filtering duplicates<br>
> >> - developers can set duplicates<br>
> >> - developers can link a crash to a bug (or create automatically a bug<br>
> >> for a crash)<br>
> >> - developers can enter a solution (that will be presented to the user<br>
> >> that hits this crash)<br>
> >> eg.:<br>
> >> - "update to version x.y"<br>
> >> - "temporary workaround: don't click button x"<br>
> >> - "you missconfigured x, see <a href="http://y.com">http://y.com</a> how to fix"<br>
> >> - "the developers are aware of this issue but have not yet fixed<br>
> >> it, see <a href="http://bugs.kde.org/.">http://bugs.kde.org/.</a>.. for details"<br>
> >> - "the bug is fixed but an update has not yet been released.<br>
> >> Update to version x.y once it released."<br>
> >> - comments can be added by users and developers (to ask how to reproduce<br>
> >> etc)<br>
> >><br>
> >> For the end user there could be the following scenarios:<br>
> >> - user posts the crash, <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> finds a duplicate crash in<br>
> >> it's database and will tell the<br>
> >> user on how to proceed (see possible solutions above)<br>
> >> - user posts the crash, <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> can't find an exact duplicate<br>
> >> and will show the user<br>
> >> all possible duplicates<br>
> >> - user posts the crash, <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> doesn't find a duplicate. User<br>
> >> gets the possibility to<br>
> >> subscribe to updates for this crash to get an email when a solution<br>
> >> for his crash was entered<br>
> >> by the developers<br>
> >><br>
> >> One big difference in implementation I would propose:<br>
> >> DrKonqi makes a *single* POST to <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> including all<br>
> >> information and then just shows<br>
> >> a WebView where the server side can do anything. That gives greater<br>
> >> independence of the used<br>
> >> KDE version and changes on the server side.<br>
> >><br>
> >> Advantages over current solution:<br>
> >> - <a href="http://bugs.kde.org">bugs.kde.org</a> isn't filled with duplicates<br>
> >> - <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> can be specialized on crashes<br>
> >> - sending a crash would not only help developers fixing that bug but<br>
> >> also help the user by showing<br>
> >> a solution for his issue.<br>
> >><br>
> >> What software could <a href="http://crashes.kde.org">crashes.kde.org</a> run? I'm not sure, maybe a<br>
> >> bugzilla installation or something<br>
> >> custom written. Or some other bugtracking software.<br>
> ><br>
> > In short: I like the idea.<br>
> ><br>
> > But I guess this needs someone to step up and actually write the required<br>
> > software. I doubt our dear sysadmins can spare the time and I also wonder<br>
> > whether it's worth to spent time on getting this quite custom functionality<br>
> > into an existing bugtracker software instead of writing the software on once<br>
> > own.<br>
><br>
> It would take quite some effort. I would say building this into <a href="http://bugs.kde.org">bugs.kde.org</a> would be the better option since the less layers, the complex the bug tracker is.<br>
I'd wouldn't do that - because it's not about bugs - it's about crashes. And instead of messing with the existing bugzilla I'd create something new.</p>
<p>><br>
> Side note: Niko, what you are proposing is something that Windows Error Reporting has been doing for years, and it seems to have served Microsoft well :)<br>
><br>
afaik windows sends only the errors (similar to what mozilla, gnome, ubuntu and others have).<br>
My idea is more than that.</p>
<p>Niko</p>