[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug reporting proceedure, was Re: Bug#24066: libc6: rsh segfaults as , a result of new libc 2.0.7r2

>>"Dale" == Dale Scheetz <dwarf@polaris.net> writes:

 Dale> On 29 Jun 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:

 >> Umm, no. It would be nice if they did it, but a novce user is
 >> perfectly free to just file a bug report. I know I often do. I find
 >> an error, usually that by itself is a frustrating experience, also,
 >> it is likely to be in the middle of a largish upgrade (I upgrade ever
 >> so often). I am not into going over and looking up stuff in the
 >> archive for a dozen pacxkages; I just send a report.

 Dale> When you do so, without adequate investigation, you imply that
 Dale> the understanding and repair of the bug is the sole
 Dale> responsibility of the maintianer. I submit, in the free
 Dale> software community, that this is a bogus position. Because of
 Dale> the freedom we provide, the user bears some responsibility in
 Dale> the maintainance of the products they use. I suggest that any
 Dale> bug report that says no more than "xxx is broken" is a useless
 Dale> report submitted by a lazy user, and, until more information is
 Dale> forthcoming, is not likely to produce results.

	I agree. However; Debiasn is also for novices and newcomers to
 Linux, and to Debian. They may well not have the skill, or the time,
 to understand and repair bugs (heck -- most of the time even seasoned
 veterans don't). 

	I would rather have bugs reports, than none. People are
 lazy. Mandate more work for a bug report, people won't report bugs. 

	You are thinking from a "We are all contributors" mind set;
 which is nice, but we have to address people who are casual users
 too, I think.
 >> Make bug reporting any more onerous than it is, and peole
 >> merely stop filing reports.

 Dale> What is so "onerous" about checking to see if the bug has
 Dale> already been reported? As Rob said, it could provide the "work
 Dale> around" information that is needed to resolve the problem.

	In the middle of an upgrade when one gets 10 bugs, One does
 not have time to research them. You just report this, this, and that
 went wrong, this is all the data I have, thought you would like to

	And I say I like to get reports like that. I may ask for more
 information, but I do not demand the reporter do anything more. 

 Dale> Suggesting, even strongly, that it is proper proceedure when
 Dale> submitting a bug, to research the bug reporting system first,
 Dale> and provide useful information second, doesn't seem onerous to
 Dale> me, and has several practical uses for the bug submitter, as
 Dale> well as the maintainer.

	Oh, suggestions are fine. 

 >> Yes. It is a good idea. It just should not be mandatory.

 Dale> Mandatory is a non-functional term in this group. Nothing is
 Dale> mandatory (even though some would wish it were) in a voluntary
 Dale> organization.

	Also, the users may not be quite as vested in Debian as the
 developers are, it is even harder to tell them to do stuff. It has
 vbeen suggested we should be grateful they take time out their busy
 lives to even report the bug. 

 Dale> I am only suggesting that we make clear that the socially
 Dale> correct way to report a bug involves adequate research on the
 Dale> part of the bug reporter.  This "requirement" provides
 Dale> additional service to the user at the same time that it
 Dale> provides the maintainer with more chance to fix the problem.

	Sure. Umm, well, maybe not as strongly as that. More on the
 lines of " we suggest that you look into the BTS to see if the
 problem has been reported before, and see if a workaround has been
 suggested there ....". Socially correct may sound like talking down
 to and berating the users

	Having written that, I don't think I made much of an
 improvement in the wording. Maybe better hands than I can write the
 gentle exhortation to check the BTS.

	However, no developer should take that statement and berate
 the reporter for shirking their duty (unless, of course, it is a
 fellow developer) ;-)

 "We all agree on the necessity of compromise.  We just can't agree on
 when it's necessary to compromise." --Larry Wall in
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E

To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org

Reply to: