strawpoll: should apport-collect add a comment or change description?

[Brian Murray]

On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 05:42:26PM -0700, Mike Rooney wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 3:26 AM, Martin Pitt <martin.pitt at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > apport-collect was introduced some weeks ago [1] to help bug triagers
> > and reporters with data collection.
> >
> > Right now it adds the "short text" part of the data to a new comment.
> > It has been suggested to append them to the description instead,
> > similar to bugs which were originally filed with apport.
> >
> > Would you prefer keeping the current "new comment" approach, which
> > results in cleaner bug emails but harder to find bug comments on the
> > web UI, or apport-collect modifying the description, which results in
> > harder to read bug mail, but cleaner web UI presentation?
> >
> 
> 
> Is there anything wrong with doing both? It would make the bug mail
> slightly more verbose (but hopefully not increase the number) and
> potentially give the best of both worlds. Then perhaps one can be
> simplified since the other exists.

I agree that performing both actions is the ideal situation.  If that
is objectionable I'd prefer the description were updated as it can be
harder to find a specific comment especially if the comment number is
higher than 80.  
 
-- 
Brian Murray                                                 @ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-devel/attachments/20090325/279d8149/attachment.pgp