Add request for about:buildconfig to Bugzilla Helper

RESOLVED FIXED in Bugzilla 2.18

Status

()

defect
RESOLVED FIXED
17 years ago
7 years ago

People

(Reporter: gerv, Assigned: gerv)

Tracking

2.17.4
Bugzilla 2.18
Bug Flags:
approval +

Details

Attachments

(1 attachment)

Following cls' request in n.p.m.unix. Sorry for the delay.

Suggested wording on
http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/enter_bug.cgi?format=guided&product=Browser :

In the Additional Information section, an extra paragraph:

"If your Mozilla binary was not obtained from mozilla.org (for example, if you
built it yourself), please include the contents of <a
href="about:buildconfig">about:buildconfig</a>."

Gerv
cls, blizzard, bbaetz: any comments before I go ahead and do this as specced?

Gerv
Isn't this a bmo hack,not a generic bugzilla thing?
My comment about needing this information from mozilla.org builds still stands
since there's no mandate about the build configuration of builds uploaded to the
ftpsite.
bbaetz: no, because the Bugzilla Helper, as checked in to Bugzilla CVS, is the
one used by mozilla.org. It creeps in as a "sample implementation of bug entry
templates" ;-)

cls: we have to compromise between laying additional requirements on all bug
reporters and increasing the size of every bug report by 13 lines, and the need
to have this information in particular cases.

A search of every comment in the database for "about:buildconfig" must put a
maximum limit on the number of times this information has been asked for by a QA
person. It reveals 16 bugs in the last two months. I therefore have difficulty
believing it's necessary on every bug report.

Gerv
Well, that ignores the fact that about:buildconfig has only been in the tree for
2 months, and there's only been one "official release" (alpha milestone) with
that feature (not advertised afaik) and that most people (QA & developers
included) still don't know about it. And again, the build number is not
necessary on *every* bug report but the ones where it is necessary, it's very
useful.  But I'm not interested in rehashing that discussion.  Just add the note
that the feature exists and perhaps people will intuit for themselves when they
think it's important to include.
I would like to have this and I'm sure lots of the QA people do, too.  They
spend a lot of time finding people using the xft and gtk2 builds that have known
issues.
Posted patch Patch v.1Splinter Review
Have I still not fixed this? Sincere apologies. Here's a patch for the Bugzilla
tip - it won't apply directly to b.m.o, but we'll get this next time b.m.o.
upgrades, at least.

Gerv
Comment on attachment 127334 [details] [diff] [review]
Patch v.1

dave: could you rubber-stamp and approve this, please?

Gerv
Attachment #127334 - Flags: review?(justdave)
Attachment #127334 - Flags: review?(justdave) → review+
Fixed in Bugzilla CVS.

Checking in template/en/default/bug/create/create-guided.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/bug/create/create-guided.html.tmpl,v
 <--  create-guided.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.10; previous revision: 1.9
done

Gerv
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → Bugzilla 2.18
QA Contact: matty_is_a_geek → default-qa
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.