Hide Forgot
abrt version: 1.1.14 architecture: x86_64 cmdline: /usr/bin/python /usr/bin/git-cola component: git-cola executable: /usr/bin/git-cola kernel: 2.6.35.10-74.fc14.x86_64 package: git-cola-1.4.3-1.fc14 reason: base.py:86:__getattr__:AttributeError: 'SearchModel' object has no attribute 'export_patchset' release: Fedora release 14 (Laughlin) time: 1296929837 uid: 500 backtrace ----- base.py:86:__getattr__:AttributeError: 'SearchModel' object has no attribute 'export_patchset' Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/share/git-cola/lib/cola/qobserver.py", line 107, in SLOT self._callbacks[param](*args) File "/usr/share/git-cola/lib/cola/controllers/search.py", line 236, in export_patch qtutils.log(*self.model.export_patchset(revision, revision)) File "/usr/share/git-cola/lib/cola/models/base.py", line 86, in __getattr__ raise AttributeError(errmsg) AttributeError: 'SearchModel' object has no attribute 'export_patchset' Local variables in innermost frame: self: <cola.models.search.SearchModel object at 0x18e6610> param: 'export_patchset' errmsg: "'SearchModel' object has no attribute 'export_patchset'" How to reproduce ----- 1. Exporting a patch 2. 3.
Created attachment 477225 [details] File: backtrace
Can you please report this crash to the upstream bug tracker at: https://github.com/davvid/git-cola/issues ?
I do have an account on github and do not plan to open one. Thks.
Then your bug will never be fixed.
Kevin, your getting on my nerves. First of all, it's not the job of the bug reporter to upstream the bug report. It's the package maintainer job. Secondly, see first point. Cheers.
First, who do you think you are for reopening a bug report without doing what was asked of you? I closed it for a reason, it will stay closed. Second, yes, by our handling procedures, it is a valid request to the reporter to have him report the bug upstream, this is NOT the maintainer's job. Third, YOU want the bug fixed. I've never encountered this bug (and I use git-cola regularly), for all I care it can stay there forever. Fourth, upstream developers may have additional questions want to talk to the person who actually encountered the bug, not a middleman. Fifth, a maintainer get many more bug reports than a reporter files, so it's much less work for a reporter to file his bugs upstream than for a maintainer to forward all the many bugs he's getting. Sixth, you're wasting my time, and this only makes me intentionally NOT want to do ANYTHING to get your bug fixed. Seventh, if you keep reopening this bug, I will either write a script to close it automatically or get you banned from Bugzilla. Eighth, get lost!
PS: I'm an unpaid volunteer. Where's that support contract you and I signed to entitle you to have me fix the bug for you? Oh, it doesn't exist? Thought so! I'm only asking you to report the bug to the place where it is best fixed, because the fix will benefit everyone (see also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Staying_close_to_upstream_projects ), I don't see what's so hard about that.
Kevin brought this to my attention. Much of the kde-sig workflow around non-high-profile and/or unreproducible bugs usually does fall in what was described above through point 4. 5 is debatable, depending on your point of view 6 while making a point, probably need not be said, and steps close to crossing the line of civility 7+ jumped over said line, my apologies.
Guys, It's the very first time a package maintainer has closed a valid bug on an non EOL Fedora version just because the reporter do not have time to work with upstream. Anyway, I don't care. I've other bugs to fix on other FOSS projects I've volunteered to maintain and enhance where I do not close bugs because the reporter lack time or account on an the bug tracking system of the underlying libs or orthogonal tools used on the software I'm hacking on. Period. Bye.