Bug 1039080

Summary:	Remove abrt ability to mark bugs as private
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	leigh scott <leigh123linux>
Component:	abrt	Assignee:	abrt <abrt-devel-list>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	rawhide	CC:	abrt-devel-list, dvlasenk, iprikryl, jfilak, mmilata, mtoman, sgallagh
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-11-11 12:38:07 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description leigh scott 2013-12-06 14:43:46 UTC

abrt shouldn't have the ability to mark bugs private.
I refuse to work all bugs marked private (I can't forward them upstream) and close them as not a bug.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=960549


I have closed dozens of reports due to this issue.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1039060


Please remove this option altogether or add all my packages to the abrt blacklist!!!

Comment 1 Stephen Gallagher 2013-12-06 14:56:55 UTC

It's absolutely necessary for people to be able to mark bugs private, since otherwise they may be making sensitive data public (or may otherwise refuse to file the bug at all).

You can *always* manually copy a bug upstream after sanitizing any sensitive data.

Demanding that a useful feature be removed because you are too lazy to properly maintain your packages is ridiculous.

Comment 2 Stephen Gallagher 2013-12-06 15:01:35 UTC

Sorry for my tone above. That was uncalled for and I apologize.

After discussion on IRC, it seems that the real problem is that a number of bugs are reported private needlessly. A better solution to this problem therefore would be to allow the bug assignee to remove private status if they determine that there is no risk of private data being exposed.

I'd be comfortable with us doing that on a trial basis (revisiting if we find that some or many maintainers are behaving improperly on this).

Comment 3 leigh scott 2013-12-06 15:18:53 UTC

(In reply to Stephen Gallagher from comment #2)
> Sorry for my tone above. That was uncalled for and I apologize.
> 

np

> After discussion on IRC, it seems that the real problem is that a number of
> bugs are reported private needlessly. A better solution to this problem
> therefore would be to allow the bug assignee to remove private status if
> they determine that there is no risk of private data being exposed.
> 

I would be willing to try this

> I'd be comfortable with us doing that on a trial basis (revisiting if we
> find that some or many maintainers are behaving improperly on this).

Comment 4 Jakub Filak 2014-11-11 12:38:07 UTC

I believe this issue has been sorted out by introducing a new group called 'fedora_contrib_private' (bug #1044653). Please feel free to reopen if I am mistaken.