Re: Re: UI changes in reporting of exceptions

Hi Glick,

There won't be any time needed to solve duplicates. I make a hash code 
of stacktrace and check just this hash code, it won't find all the 
duplicates but it's very fast and it doesn't waste user's time. More 
exact check will be done at server side after reporting an issue. This 
feature is done to inform the user, that such an issue is already known. 
If the stacktrace is changed, hash code is different and for this 
situation issues are different. This should be resolved on the server 
side because it will really need longer time to solve.

The registration is done because  we need to contact the user later and 
we want just interested users to send us their reports. We don't need 
mounts of stacktraces without any info. It's not valuable for us. The 
description is done for the same reason. We are doing some tracking of 
IDE, but I believe user can give us some more information, why not to 
ask him to give us some help?

Component and subcoponents are another quite controversial think. I 
understand not everyone understand stacktraces and can fill this item. 
We can suggest the component and subcomponent from stacktrace, but we 
cannot do it surely now. We can do just some estimation, which will be 
filled as default. User doesn't have to change these items, but he can. 
I believe there are some users who understand and we want to give them a 
chance to change it and help us this way.

What do you think is it better to give users a chance to help us, or not 
to bother him with some not compulsory items?

Thanks for ideas.

J.

Jesse Glick wrote:
> Jindrich Sedek wrote:
>> http://www.netbeans.org/source/browse/*checkout*/logger/uihandler/src/org/netbeans/modules/uihandler/api/doc-files/ui.html 
>> http://wiki.netbeans.org/wiki/view/ReportExceptionProject
>
> IMHO: keep it very, very simple for the user. Do not require them to 
> register on netbeans.org or you will lose most of the potential 
> reports. Do not make them wait while you look for duplicates; 
> duplicates can be detected using a database query later. Do not even 
> ask them for component and subcomponent; if it's a stack trace, we can 
> get that information ourselves.
>
> And do not bother asking "what were you doing?" - they were using the 
> IDE, and it broke. If the stack trace does not include enough 
> information to diagnose and maybe fix the problem, it is the 
> developer's responsibility to include information assert statements 
> earlier in the source, attach information about the problematic 
> content, etc. - then someone using a later version of the IDE who has 
> the same problem will produce a more useful stack trace.
>
> -J.
>