Nice bug reports(Was: Senseless Bickering and Overpoliticization
On Tuesday 31 August 1999, at 15 h 16, the keyboard of Anthony Towns
<aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> > egotistical or power-greedy maintainers are actively compatative with
> > those that submit bugs or try to help.=20
>
> While others try to remain friendly and helpful even when bug reports
> are miscategorised as `critical' instead of `wishlist', have almost no
> information to help diagnose the problem, are obviously the result of
> user error, or are just irritatingly impolite.
I disagree. From my experience, almost all the bug reports are well done. This may be because the interface to the BTS is a bit crude, therefore barring AOL users to submit bugs. Or this may be because Debian is only used by the elite. But the fact is I very rarely had to ask details or rewording to bug submitters.
The most common mistake I see in "my" bug reports is duplication (bugs already reported). But this can be because of offline users who didn't want to connect just to check the BTS, so it may be forgivable.
The bug submitters are specially nice to do so when you see how many maintainers ignore bug reports and do not have the guts to formally orphan their packages when they have no time to process the bugs.
Irony: bugs.debian.org is one of the worst packages, in that respect.
Reply to: