https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=371934
Bug ID: 371934
Summary: compatibility with DrKonqi
Product: bugs.kde.org
Version: unspecified
Platform: Compiled Sources
OS: All
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: grave
Priority: NOR
Component: product/component changes
Assignee: sysad...@kde.org
Reporter: rjvber...@gmail.com
CC: cgiboude...@gmx.com
Target Milestone: ---
I have just had another rejection of a crash I had hoped to report *quickly*
via DrKonqi. This time, I hit a max. comment limit I have never seen before
(error code 114), which is evidently not very difficult to do when you include
a full backtrace in the initial report body.
I've asked about the plans with DrKonqi on the plasma-devel ML, but I'd hope we
all agree that it's important that users file bug reports where appropriate,
and that they're more likely to do so the more streamlined the process is.
Keeping a reporting tool around that gets you a rejection message (and then
doesn't even let you back up and prune the report if it's simply too long) is
counterproductive: the risk is real that many users will simply dismiss the
dialog after a few such experiences and not bother reporting at all.
Anyway, may I suggest doing whatever it takes in BKO settings to increase
compatibility with DrKonqi until that tool gains a working feature to include
backtraces as an attachment (if the site even supports such a feature)?
I'm pretty sure it must be possible to distinguish reports coming in via the
website and via DrKonqi. It might also be possible to raise or remove the
length limit on the initial message (I'd argue the initial report is not a
comment and thus not subject to comment length limits ...).
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
