On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 6:24 AM, David Edmundson <da...@davidedmundson.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 9:28 AM, René J.V. Bertin <rjvber...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Sorry if this has already been answered somewhere where I've missed it: >> >> DrKonqi has lost much of its interest (in v5.8.2) due to recent changes >> in BKO. Most of the crashes I've been trying to report via the tool have >> led to rejection because of an overzealous spam filter, and now because >> there's a (new? lowered?) max. limit of 64k characters per comment. >> Evidently an inline backtrace can be much longer than that. >> >> I do agree that it'd be better for readability to put backtraces in an >> attachment; >> > > As attachments is awful. You cannot search if it's in an attachment. > Searching is ridiculously important. > For improving readability, there is bugzilla-traceparser plugin, that can dynamically hide looooooooong backtraces with a bit of JS magic to expand them and much more like finding duplicates and also auto-dupe. I still think this would help tremendously to all our bugzilla users. See https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=354217 Cheers -- Martin Klapetek
