1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> Taking any of it out would be |
3 |
> removing things that are required to determine the cause of a bug. |
4 |
|
5 |
I doubt that's true in most cases: The information needed to |
6 |
finding the bug is a (possibly small) subset of the whole. |
7 |
|
8 |
I don't see how additionally providing a stripped down version of |
9 |
paludis info hurts anybody, as the subset either holds what the |
10 |
wrangler needs or it doesn't, in which case they can still request |
11 |
more information for the reporter. |
12 |
|
13 |
I suggest that you take this as a usability request from the users |
14 |
of your software. Isn't that a great chance to make several people |
15 |
happier every day in the future by just a few lines of code on your end? |
16 |
Would they raise their voice if it did not matter? |
17 |
|
18 |
|
19 |
|
20 |
Sebastian |