Re: Clueless bug reports from autobuilders.
Martin Schulze <joey@kyllikki.infodrom.north.de> immo vero scripsit
I was feeling really unwell when I have sent the original mail,
but I will justify what I have written.
> > I am getting more of these bug reports from autobuilders, and I would like
> > to suggest this.
>
> Umh. When the auto-builders came up thiese kind of bug reports were not
> appreciated and the porters didn't report them, they (espcially Roman, many
> thanks) reported proper reports, which often did include fixes to the problem
> when the bug was due to the code being too ia32-centric.
>
> Did this change when more buildd went active?
Yes.
Recently, I am seeing that the quality of bug reports is getting lower,
from, presumably, people who are new to this.
See #111555, and tell me if you would think that the bugreport
was helpful at all, apart from making me realize that there was a
problem.
> > Many just send me a bug log, and that doesn't really tell me much,
> > because it lacks the following information :
> >
> > o what was the last version of the software that DID compile
> > and build.
>
> call ``madison package'' on auric.
It needs a shell access. I don't always have shell access to auric.
regards,
junichi
--
dancer@debian.org http://www.netfort.gr.jp/~dancer
Reply to: