Review Request 110687: DrKonqi should check for disabled version as the very first step in the reporting assistant.

[Àlex Fiestas]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110687/#review33274
-----------------------------------------------------------


Maybe I'm blind, but I don't see any patch attached to the review :s

- Àlex Fiestas


On May 28, 2013, 8:03 a.m., Jekyll Wu wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110687/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated May 28, 2013, 8:03 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for KDE Runtime and George Kiagiadakis.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> As I have said in https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=315073#c3,  Bugzilla's new and nice behavior (since 4.2.5) of rejecting reports against disabled versions brings a new usability problem to DrKonqi: users spend value time in downloading debug symbols, generating the backtrace, writing all information he/she can recall, but in the end only to find an error dialog which tells them (in a not so clear and friendly way) that bugs.kde.org won't receive his/her report. 
> 
> I would propose making version checking the very first step in the reporting assistant: a perfect bug report against a outdated version is still useless. 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> This addresses bug 315073.
>     http://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=315073
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/110687/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jekyll Wu
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20130528/ddc92cb6/attachment.htm>