The need for apport hooks (was: Re: SRUs for typo fixes in descriptions)

[Bryce Harrington]

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 07:17:52AM +0200, Rick Spencer wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-08-06 at 15:46 -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > > 
> > > <side comment> I think we are doing it wrong: we should collect
> > > crashes on all supported releases. </side comment>
> > 
> > I agree.  As designed, apport files a new bug report for each crash,
> > which can quickly lead to excessive numbers of dupe bug reports (there
> > are ways of making apport auto-dupe, but this takes effort to set up and
> > isn't always 100% reliable).  This can quickly become unmanageable
> > especially for packages that lack someone to keep an eye on the bug
> > reports.
> > 
> > In any case, these types of reports post-release are most useful in
> > aggregate rather than as individual bug reports.  If they were filed in
> > some ultra simple crash database (with no signup required of the user)
> > we could get most of the value without incurring a lot of extra bug
> > labor.
> Has this very thing not been proposed? We should discuss doing this for
> 12.04.

It's been propsed and discussed previously, like ScottK mentioned.  The
issue has been finding someone with time to work on it.

Bryce