public inbox for overseers@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Edelsohn <dje.gcc@gmail.com>
To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>
Cc: Overseers <overseers@sourceware.org>,
	"Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: GCC Bugzilla accounts
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 12:41:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGWvnymuARotq4ZMca0E3fK7+64_aCvKmrK0O3pj9YRWLCFwDg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <319d4fda-59ff-dc5b-ee36-21fc5e84518d@redhat.com>

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 07:54 AM, David Edelsohn wrote:
>> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 4:16 PM, Ian Lance Taylor <ian@airs.com> wrote:
>>> Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 25 May 2017, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Instead there we allow users to create all of their own accounts, but by
>>>>> default you don't get editbugs. You have to have someone grant you editbugs,
>>>>> and that can be done by anyone else who previously had editbugs, so you can
>>>>> just email the list and someone will quickly bless you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is the account creation still an anti-spam tactic?
>>>>>
>>>>> I think it's a terrible one, the editbugs removal seems to have worked much
>>>>> better. Now spammers cant change any existing bugs. They can still file
>>>>> new bugs, which we can zap entirely.
>>>>
>>>> Spammers were filing new spam bugs about as fast as contrib/mark_spam.py
>>>> could mark them as spam.
>>>
>>> Personally, I think the ideal approach would be if bugzilla supported a
>>> moderation strategy.  Anybody could create an account, but the first
>>> time they filed a bug, or commented on a bug, their change would be held
>>> for moderation.  If a moderator approved a change, their subsequent
>>> changes would flow automatically.  If the moderator blocked the change,
>>> the account would be disabled.  Then we would only require a few people
>>> to periodically moderate new bugzilla users.
>>>
>>> But that is just a wish.  I have no reason to believe that bugzilla
>>> supports this approach.
>>
>> What are the next steps to improve the GCC Bugzilla account creation
>> process to reduce the number of users and bug reporters who are driven
>> away?
>
> Put together a GNU Toolchain fund project to fund the work? ;-)
>
> Concretely I think we need a design document explaining how it should
> work, and that needs to be discussed, and when it's ready we probably
> would want upstream bugzilla to agree to it, and then we fund the work
> to deliver it?

How can we improve the current situation while we bikeshed new
features for Bugzilla?  The current requests for account creation
either are being lost or not responded.  The current process needs to
be addressed.

Thanks, David

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-31 12:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-25 16:07 David Edelsohn
2017-05-25 16:26 ` Joseph Myers
2017-05-25 16:37   ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-05-25 16:41     ` Joseph Myers
2017-05-25 20:16       ` Ian Lance Taylor
2017-05-25 20:35         ` Gerald Pfeifer
2017-05-25 21:36           ` Frédéric Buclin via overseers
2017-05-31 11:54         ` David Edelsohn
2017-05-31 12:38           ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-05-31 12:41             ` David Edelsohn [this message]
2017-05-31 13:14               ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2017-05-31 13:22                 ` David Edelsohn
2017-05-31 14:39                   ` Christopher Faylor
2017-05-31 14:49                     ` David Edelsohn
2017-06-01 14:19                       ` Joseph Myers
2017-06-01 14:44                         ` Christopher Faylor
2017-06-01 14:53                           ` David Edelsohn
2017-06-01 19:56                             ` Christopher Faylor
2017-06-05 15:39                               ` David Edelsohn
2017-06-05 15:49                                 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2017-06-16 22:02                             ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2017-06-17 12:07                               ` David Edelsohn
2017-06-20 22:40                               ` David Edelsohn
2017-06-21 22:02                                 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2017-06-23 13:39                                   ` David Edelsohn
2017-07-13 18:29                                   ` David Edelsohn
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-12-12 15:53 gcc bugzilla accounts Damien Ruscoe

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAGWvnymuARotq4ZMca0E3fK7+64_aCvKmrK0O3pj9YRWLCFwDg@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=dje.gcc@gmail.com \
    --cc=carlos@redhat.com \
    --cc=joseph@codesourcery.com \
    --cc=overseers@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).