Re: bug reports with urls in them
Fernando Lemos <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 1, 2012 at 8:45 AM, Michael Welle <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Michael Banck <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 11:31:49AM +0200, Michael Welle wrote:
>>>> Anyways, what if I want to report a bug that happens if I use foo.org?
>>> We can discuss this again once this is actually the case.
>> chances that users without technical background come back and report
>> that bug a second time (after figuring out what might be wrong) are slim
>> I think.
> How do you suggest we fix this? We certainly can't disable spam
> filters or we'll be flooded with spam. If you follow debian-devel, you
> must also know that a web reporting frontend was discussed in length
> already, so hopefully this won't be brought up again.
ah, now that you mention that, nah, just kidding ;). Well, the short
answer is, I don't know how to fix the spam problem. I don't use such
blacklist services for the machines I'm responsible for - and I'm still
alive. I tried it a few years ago, but for me it causes more trouble
than that it helps.
> I'm not sure it's a problem even worth discussing. The trouble of
> coming up with a solution seems much bigger than the inconvenience of
> missing an odd report here and there (I'd be curious to know how often
> a report is wrongfully rejected).
And furthermore it would be interesting to see what one would gain using
such services. Either the service isn't used for this mailing list or
it is easy to fool by lacking the http:// part of the url. What would
happen if the bug report would been sent from that hostname? I hope it
would have been blocked ;).
> Also, let's be practical. If the reporter doesn't realize something
> went wrong with the report, he or she is most likely not very
> tech-savvy. Those reports are still mostly useful, but in a sea of bug
> reports, those are often the least useful. And if the reporter does
> notice that the report has been wrongfully rejected but can't be
> bothered to report it again, perhaps the issue wasn't such a big deal.
I agree only partly with that. Losing a bug report or two is one
thing. Imagine a potential or actual customer sending an email to a
company and getting a response like: 'Well, we don't know on which data
we form our opinion, but we think you are a nigerian scammer or you eat
kitten babies. Either way, we don't like you, go away.'. That's what's
> I'm not saying it's good that we miss reports like this, but we must
> put things into perspective.
I tried to give perspective from a bug reporters point of view, who
simply want to report a bug without being interested in external
blacklist and stuff.
biff4emacsen - A biff-like tool for (X)Emacs
Flood - Your friendly network packet generator