On 2020/03/23 12:00, Kevin Chadwick wrote:
> On 2020-03-23 11:09, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > The bugs@ list is intended for in-depth bug reports with a clear problem
> > description and as much hard data as possible to support the problem
> > hypothesis. Not random snippets of info with many open questions.
> 
> >> "almost always implies a wrong key."
> 
> Yet, I have had two examples countering that in a short period!
> 
> I just wanted to be clear that there was an issue, in case you were dismissing
> the whole bug as a wpakey issue, and wanted to be clear that something was
> broken and since fixed, in case the whole bug had been dismissed out of hand.
> 
> In regard to the OpenBSD access point in question. This exact hardware spec
> (apu4 with ar9281) has been used before without issue over a year ago and as I
> said. I will open a new bug, if it persists with a replacement modem.
> 
> I apologise for the number of mails.
> 

Not just directed to you but anyone reading who reports problems:

The thing about spreading information between multiple mails is that anyone
looking into the problem then needs to spend time piecing them together.

It's really helpful if a bug report mail can stand on its own - don't assume
that the reader has access to old messages relating to the problem, instead
collect all the information relating to a problem together in one place.
Before sending, have a read through of what you've written, see if that
mail contains everything you know about the problem - if not then add
things back in.


Reply via email to