Is it enough to send an error report whenever the dialog pops up after a crash, or should we be submitting it to the bugtracking system as well (in which case, is there even any point filling in an error report in the first place)? I've sent quite a few over the past weeks, but there's no confirmation as to whether they're getting through or not.

Thanks,

(c:

Can you please provide a screenshot of the error reporter in question?

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/100 ... orter.jpeg

For some reason I couldn't post the image directly here - it keeps saying "It was not possible to determine the dimensions of the image." Any idea what that's about?

Ah, this error reporter is only for Windows. It uses breakpad and posts crash backtraces to http://krita-breakpad.kogmbh.net:1127/ -- the backtraces only work if I don't forget to upload symbols. We mostly use it as a kind of statistic to see where crashes tend to happen and if a new release is more unstable.

If you have a reproducible way to crash krita, you should use bugs.kde.org to make a report -- and refer to having posted backtraces to breakpad.kogmbh.net so we can try to find the right backtrace.

Ok thanks Boud. It sounds like rule of thumb then would be to only bother sending an error report if I plan to follow through with a report at bugs.kde.org? Ideally the info in the description field of the error reporter would automatically be sent to the bugtracker (if that's at all possible), bearing in mind that the easier it is for us to report issues, the more likely we are to do so.

Speaking of which, here's something I've been wondering for some time: what's the most efficient way for us to make bug reports and feature requests? For example, I wasn't too sure in the beginning so I started off posting them in the forums (which I see others doing as well), in the hope of getting confirmation before making an official report, but now I usually just cut to the chase and go straight to bugs.kde.org (because, well, it's easier). It would be good to know the exact "officially endorsed" procedure, so as to make it as quick, efficient and painless as possible. Perhaps it could even be a sticky?

(c:

Well... The trouble is that for bugs.kde.org, I need a spare saturday now and then to check all unconfirmed bugs. I haven't had a spare saturday since the start of the kickstarter, because I spent all my time on the OSX build... So I'm hundreds of bug mails behind in my queue.

As for the forum, I also try to keep up with that, but that also suffered.

Usually, though, the ideal way for a feature request is doing a discussion among users here on the forum, then on #krita so both users and developers can do some real-time discussion, and then finally a wish on bugs.kde.org.

But even then, implementing a certain wish might take ages, given the list of things we want to do .

Fair enough, don't mean to put the pressure on . To the contrary, whatever makes it easiest for you. So for bugs (as opposed to wish lists), would you suggest we send them straight to bugs.kde.org, or run them by the forums first?