On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 06:04:42PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jul 2010, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 04:56:03PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > With a free form field called "System specific information, please paste > > > here the output of “reportbug --template <package>”". > > > > > > That could even be reasonable. > > > > Except many people won't bother doing that. > > The CGI could verify that the field is not empty and that it contains > the usual reportbug markers (like "-- System Information:"). > > > I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a webinterface, but > > perhaps make it easier to find that webinterface if people use > > reportbug. That is, have a desktop icon "file a bug" that causes > > reportbug to gather the necessary information from the local system, > > submit an HTTP request with template information over SOAP or some such, > > receive an HTTP URL from the server, and then fire off sensible-browser > > with said URL to allow the user to fill in whatever needs to be filled > > in. > > That's another interesting alternative. But it requires status storage on > the server between the SOAP request and the HTTP request coming from the > user's browser.
Yes, of course, but that's not the biggest problem -- there are many ways of doing that in a sane manner. -- The biometric identification system at the gates of the CIA headquarters works because there's a guard with a large gun making sure no one is trying to fool the system. http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/01/biometrics.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100727165201.go11...@celtic.nixsys.be
