Comment 15 for bug 512552

On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 18:28 +0000, Elliot Murphy wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Leonard Richardson
> <email address hidden> wrote:
> > This might not be a helpful thing to say, but should you really be
> > putting 400k of data into a bug comment? Maybe you should be putting the
> > test output into a bug attachment. I don't know if this would avoid the
> > timeout, but it seems like a better design.
>
> Do merge proposals have attachments? I thought they only had comments.

No, they only have comments. But attachments don't seem to have this
problem, presumably because the data doesn't go into the db. If bug
attachments were failing, I'm sure we'd have a LOT more people
complaining about apport not working.

As for not doing so, I would love to only put the failures in the
comment, but trial doesn't work that way, and there isn't a particularly
easy way to trim the output from stdout/stderr to only give what we
really need to know. And if the build fails, we want to know where and
why and see the build logs. Maybe a longer term solution would be to
allow attachments on merge proposals, so we can just attach the build
logs, etc...