Redirecting ABRT spam

[Matthias Clasen]

On Mon, 2009-09-14 at 14:44 +0000, Colin Walters wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 2:35 PM, Matthias Clasen <mclasen at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > Another thing that would be good to prevent and F12 bug flood is to make
> > duplicate catching work better. I've had to manually mark a number of
> > abrt reports with very similar stacktraces as dupes. I would have
> > expected abrt to figure that out by itself.
> 
> Duplicate catching is only part of the problem.   I have a few arguments:
> 
> 1) At a very fundamental level, the generating at least one email to a
> developer per crash *does not scale*.  Crashes can happen for an
> amazing number of reasons totally unrelated to the software that
> crashed.  We CANNOT create a developer task per crash by default.
> 2) We won't actually get the data because of Bugzilla login hurdles.
> Right now only people really willing to jump through a lot of hoops
> will be able to successfully file a bug.  This drastically reduces the
> crash data we get and radically distorts it.
> 3) Associating a crash by default with an email address (as Bugzilla
> requires) is wrong.  They may contain private data in the stack
> arguments, and ideally (if we had a sane storage system) we'd be able
> to accept the full core file (suitably compressed for transfer, and
> with a privacy note)>

All this might be true. But as long as abrt does dump crashes into
bugzilla, I'd really rather have it identify dupes, than having to do it
myself.