filed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1289167
On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Aaron Klotz <akl...@mozilla.com> wrote: > On 7/25/2016 12:20 AM, Nicholas Nethercote wrote: >> >> I suspect it is rare for this field to be useful. (I've never found it >> useful.) It is also long, typically dozens of lines, and typically accounts >> for a quarter or more of the space taken up by the fields in the "Details" >> tab. >> > I use it when evaluating potential additions to the DLL blocklist. If the > proposed DLL is an LSP, we cannot block it. Typically the crash reports > whose correlations made the case for blocking the DLL will also show whether > or not that DLL is an LSP via that field. > > The additional GUID spew is also useful if we end up landing the LSP > blocklist that I prototyped in bug 1238735. > >> I propose removing it from the "Details" tab. It will still be visible in >> the "Metadata" tab. Any objections? Am I missing any reason why it is >> frequently useful? >> > No objections. As long as it is available *somewhere* on crash-stats, that > should be fine. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "projectuptime-team" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to projectuptime-team+unsubscr...@mozilla.com. > To post to this group, send email to projectuptime-t...@mozilla.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/a/mozilla.com/d/msgid/projectuptime-team/9518aa52-d0b1-19ee-cc45-a3e32cea7bf9%40mozilla.com. _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
