[Adium-devl] Looking at Smart Crash Reports redeux

[David Smith]

	I don't think we can reasonably do that. We *know* how to support  
10.3 with no major compromises for all planned 1.0 features except  
the crash reporter. In an ideal world the crash reporter shouldn't  
even be a user visible feature, it's only there to help us. The  
reason why I think we can drop 10.3 crash reports is that (for me, at  
least) the current crash reporter is enough of a pain to use that I  
don't look at it much. Even when I do look at it, searches take so  
long that I've often gotten distracted by something else by the time  
the result appears. With good reporting statistics and good  
searchability we can make Adium's stability something we can focus on  
in a quantitative way, rather than just having a vague idea that "oh,  
we fixed some crashes in this build. It's probably more stable". If  
SCR can't provide what we need (not sure if they have crash  
statistics, they don't have our exception handling), I think we  
should work with Unsanity to get it integrated. As boredzo says, we  
do have BSD-licensed exception code they can use.

														David

On Jan 13, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Christopher Forsythe wrote:

> Ok, so in all honesty, do we care about 10.3? We're a user centric  
> app with none of the devs using 10.3 as their primary (i.e. only a  
> few have 10.3, and only for testing from what I can tell). We're  
> going to tell 10.2 users to go to Fire, why can't we do that with  
> 10.3 users?
>
> If we're not caring about their crash reports, we should just draw  
> the line now. The reason the 10.2 experience sucks on Adium is  
> because everyone stopped caring about 10.2 basically. If we stop  
> caring about something as core as crash reports, we might as well  
> drop 10.3 on the whole.
>
> This gives us the ability to use spotlight, core data, and not put  
> in silly work arounds for 10.3, along with other things. We can  
> test it easier, release it easier, and spend less time rebooting to  
> test. It means we shed a certain percentage of users, but it also  
> means we shed some problematic things going on with the 10.3 stuff.  
> Everyone devotes their time here, everyone does this for free, so  
> why keep it around?
>
> Chris
>
> On Jan 13, 2006, at 2:20 PM, Mac-arena the Bored Zo wrote:
>
>> 	(3) just because it happened on Panther doesn't mean we can't fix  
>> it. and we should fix it as long as our minimum isn't Tiger.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Adium-devl mailing list
> Adium-devl at adiumx.com
> http://adiumx.com/mailman/listinfo/adium-devl_adiumx.com