The apport hook discourages new bug reports
Affects | Status | Importance | Assigned to | Milestone | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
xorg (Ubuntu) |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Bryce Harrington | ||
Natty |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Bryce Harrington | ||
Oneiric |
Fix Released
|
Undecided
|
Bryce Harrington |
Bug Description
[Impact]
Message for the apport hook causes some confusion for X and compiz bug reporters that are trying to report bugs post-release.
[Development Fix]
The same change was applied to the ubuntu xorg git tree and will be uploaded shortly.
[Stable Fix]
The user is presented with a choice of three 'yes' options: One to flag regressions, one to flag bugs with patches, and one for everything else. For the last option we simplify the wording to just say 'Yes'. Ideally we'd like people to exhaust technical support options before filing bug reports, but recommending they do so is causing confusion.
[Test Case]
Running 'ubuntu-bug xorg' on natty will show the dialog.
[Regression Potential]
The worst thing that can happen from this change would be that the xorg apport hook no longer works for attaching info to bug reports.
[Original Report]
When I use ubuntu-bug to report bugs on xorg-related packages (unity, compiz, xorg), I'm presented with this question:
Development is completed for the 'natty' version of Ubuntu, so you should use technical support channels unless you know for certain it should be reported here?
If I found a bug that I want to report, the only applicable yes option is "Yes, The problem began after doing a system software update." This implies that the developers are interested in regressions, but not new bugs.
More information on the askubuntu question here: http://
Brian Murray said it's due to xorg's apport hook and I was asked to report this bug.
It's frustrating as a user to run ubuntu-bug to report a bug, then be told to go to askubuntu, then be told there that it's a bug and you should report it. However, I also want developers to spend their available time fixing real bugs.
Perhaps if the hook added a "tech-supported" tag to bugs that had already gone through tech support so that those bugs can rise to the top?
Or if you could import an AskUbuntu question into a bug report so it feels like asking on AskUbuntu is an important step in the bug reporting process. (Yes, copy-paste does most of that, but I think psychologically it's very different.)
ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 11.04
Package: xorg 1:7.6+4ubuntu3
ProcVersionSign
Uname: Linux 2.6.38-8-generic x86_64
NonfreeKernelMo
Architecture: amd64
CompizPlugins: [core,bailer,
CompositorRunning: compiz
DRM.card0.DP.1:
status: disconnected
enabled: disabled
dpms: Off
modes:
edid-base64:
DRM.card0.LVDS.1:
status: connected
enabled: enabled
dpms: On
modes: 1366x768
edid-base64: AP/////
DRM.card0.VGA.1:
status: disconnected
enabled: disabled
dpms: Off
modes:
edid-base64:
Date: Fri May 6 13:57:18 2011
DistUpgraded: Fresh install
DistroCodename: natty
DistroVariant: ubuntu
DkmsStatus: bcmwl, 5.100.82.38+bdcom, 2.6.38-8-generic, x86_64: installed
GraphicsCard:
Intel Corporation Mobile 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller [8086:2a42] (rev 07) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:02aa]
Subsystem: Dell Device [1028:02aa]
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 11.04 "Natty Narwhal" - Release amd64 (20110427.1)
MachineType: Dell Inc. Inspiron 1545
ProcEnviron:
LANGUAGE=en_CA:en
LANG=en_CA.UTF-8
SHELL=/bin/bash
ProcKernelCmdLine: BOOT_IMAGE=
Renderer: Unknown
SourcePackage: xorg
UpgradeStatus: No upgrade log present (probably fresh install)
dmi.bios.date: 05/13/2009
dmi.bios.vendor: Dell Inc.
dmi.bios.version: A07
dmi.board.name: 0G848F
dmi.board.vendor: Dell Inc.
dmi.chassis.type: 8
dmi.chassis.vendor: Dell Inc.
dmi.modalias: dmi:bvnDellInc.
dmi.product.name: Inspiron 1545
dmi.sys.vendor: Dell Inc.
version.compiz: compiz 1:0.9.4+
version.ia32-libs: ia32-libs 20090808ubuntu13
version.libdrm2: libdrm2 2.4.23-1ubuntu6
version.
version.
version.
version.
version.
version.
version.
tags: | added: kubuntu |
Changed in xorg (Ubuntu Natty): | |
status: | New → In Progress |
Changed in xorg (Ubuntu Oneiric): | |
status: | New → In Progress |
Changed in xorg (Ubuntu Natty): | |
assignee: | nobody → Bryce Harrington (bryce) |
description: | updated |
"Perhaps if the hook added a "tech-supported" tag to bugs that had already gone through tech support so that those bugs can rise to the top? Or if you could import an AskUbuntu question into a bug report so it feels like asking on AskUbuntu is an important step in the bug reporting process. (Yes, copy-paste does most of that, but I think psychologically it's very different.)"
I'm not sure how that all would be implemented, but it's not a bad idea.
"It's frustrating as a user to run ubuntu-bug to report a bug, then be told to go to askubuntu, then be told there that it's a bug and you should report it. However, I also want developers to spend their available time fixing real bugs."
Right, this came out of a discussion I had with Jorge in Dallas. A huge proportion of the people filing bugs against X post-release are more motivated to get a quick workaround to get their machine working. Once they have a workaround they're less interested in expending time with the additional testing, git-bisecting, and diagnostics needed to root cause a problem. So... we get into the situation of "fixing" hardware one machine at a time, which doesn't scale that well.
Further, these users get annoyed because pretty much only developers answer X bug reports on launchpad, and there are very few developers and they're very busy so it's common that users report a bug and not get a response for a long time (if ever). By the time a developer does cycle through to them, the user has either found some other way to work around the problem or given up, and so the bug is unworkable. I believe we serve these types of users better by directing them out of launchpad to forums or support sites where they're more likely to get a timely response and guidance to published workarounds... or yeah, it's a bug, file it in launchpad.
If we can leverage askubuntu.com better, we can solve both needs - users get faster replies and quicker help working around problems, and developers don't have to dig through as much noise to find the bugs that really need fixing.
Although, I'll admit I hadn't considered that the compiz folks might prefer to have all bug reports filed, even support requests and such. It would be pretty trivial to conditionalize this dialog to not run for compiz/unity bugs.