Being nice to testers - mandating debug packages

[Michael T. Richter]

On Fri, 2006-13-01 at 08:39 -0800, Daniel Robitaille wrote:
> Non-reporting bugs you have found is unproductive for the community
> since they will likely go unsolved.

You could turn that around and say "making bugs difficult to report is
unproductive for the..." and so on.

I've had several crashes--ugly ones--of applications.  The ones that pop
up "bug buddy" (or whatever it's called).  Ones that ultimately didn't
get reported.  Why?  Because "bug buddy" winds up, in the end, dropping
a huge steaming load on my desktop telling me to email it to some
address.  It doesn't do anything smart like, say, putting the email
address into the file name or anything useful like that, so I'm left,
after already jumping through hoops (about half the time it wants to
update itself before allowing me to progress!), with an enormous blob to
be sent to an email address I've forgotten since I don't often have a
pencil and paper in reach just in case my computer decides to cack on
me.

So how about instead of an emailed bug report mechanism Bug Buddy hits a
web site?  And stores any reports it can't send right away for later
attempts?  And only uses email as an absolute last resort after it has
failed the web attempt X number of times?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20060114/e367513e/attachment.pgp