Bug 1039080 - Remove abrt ability to mark bugs as private
Summary: Remove abrt ability to mark bugs as private
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: abrt
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: abrt
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-12-06 14:43 UTC by leigh scott
Modified: 2014-11-11 12:38 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-11-11 12:38:07 UTC
Type: Bug


Attachments (Terms of Use)

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.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.