940499 - add 'support' classifier system to the processor

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Socorro :: Backend, task)

Description

[K Lars Lohn [:lars] [:klohn]]

add a rule system to the processor to implement support classifiers.  Allow there to be mutliple classifications.  Implement the first support classifier as the BitguardClassfier rule.

BitguardClassfier:  if 'bitguard.dll' is present in the modules list, add the classification "bitguard" to the list of support classifications.

Comment 1

[Benjamin Smedberg]

I don't think we need a *list* of support classifications. I'd prefer there to just be a single support classification backed by a list of rules that we check.

Comment 2

[K Lars Lohn [:lars] [:klohn]]

Attachment: PR to add Support Classifiers (and "bitguard" classifier) to the processor

Comment 3

[K Lars Lohn [:lars] [:klohn]]

:bsemedberg - I find the preference for a single classifier to be curious. Having only one classification implies a hierarchy of rules with earlier rules taking precedent over latter rules.  

For example, let's say in a few months that "bitguard" is no longer much of a problem, but the existence of the 'lars_addon' is a much bigger issue.  If a crash has both, we'd be automatically be tagging the crash as "bitguard", ignoring the more serious issue. Yeah, we could retire the "bitguard" rule, or manage the hierarchy, but would we actually get around to doing it?  I want to maximize our effectiveness in light of our historical passivity in managing lists.  

would a keyed mapping be more palatable?  rather than storing a list, we have a dict keyed by classification:

    assertTrue('bitguard' in classifications.support)
    assertEqual(classifications.support.bitguard.classification, 'bitguard')
    assertTruel(classifications.support.bitguard.classification_data is None)  
    assertEqual(classifications.support.bitguard.classification_version, 1.0)
    assertTrue('lars_addon' in classifications.support)
    assertEqual(classifications.support.keys(), ['bitguard', 'lars_addon'])

I will implement however you wish...

Comment 4

[Benjamin Smedberg]

The purpose of the support classifier is to present a solution to the user. I don't think that we'd ever want to present multiple solutions, so I'd prefer to just come up with a single answer for 'what went wrong and what can you do about it'. It will be easier for the email system and the support system if we do that here, rather than forcing later tiers to do it.

If there are two possible causes for a crash, we should order the rules so that the most specific or most likely reason is the one that "wins".

Comment 5

[Robert Kaiser]

I guess that bug 915667 probably should depend on this, right?

Comment 6

[K Lars Lohn [:lars] [:klohn]]

re-implemented with one support classification supported rather than a list of them.

Comment 7

[[github robot]]

Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/mozilla/socorro

https://github.com/mozilla/socorro/commit/a97b14beb70ec5f1c7b103574839da9ace92c25e
Merge pull request #1684 from twobraids/bitguard-classifier

FIxes Bug 940499 - add support classifier system