Re: Dedicated kernel bug database

[Dave Jones <davej@codemonkey.org.uk>]

On Thu, Dec 19, 2002 at 11:48:16AM -0600, Eli Carter wrote:
 > >Also, we could have a non-web interface, (telnet or gopher to the bug
 > >DB, or control it by E-Mail).
 > Can you interface with bugzilla's database backend maybe?  It seems like 
 > refactoring bugzilla might be better?

It's an annoyance to me that the current bugzilla we use can only
do 1 way email. Ie, I receive email when things change, but I can't
reply to that mail and have my comments auto-added.
Other bugzillas can do this, so I think either some switch needs
to be enabled, or theres some extension not present.
(I'm a complete bugzilla weenie, and no nothing about how its set up).

 > >It could warn the user if they attach an un-decoded oops that their
 > >bug report isn't as useful as it could be, and if they mention a
 > >distribution kernel version, that it's not a tree that the developers
 > >will necessarily be familiar with
 > Perhaps a more generalized hook into bugzilla for 'validating' a bug 
 > report, then code specific validators for kernel work?

Its a nice idea, but I think it's a lot of effort to get it right,
when a human can look at the dump, realise its not decoded, and
send a request back in hardly any time at all.
I also don't trust things like this where if something goes wrong,
we could lose the bug report. People are also more likely to ping-pong
,argue or "how do I..." with a human than they are with an automated robot.


		Dave

-- 
| Dave Jones.        http://www.codemonkey.org.uk