Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 02:50 -0700, Duncan wrote: > > What I'd do with such bugs is thank the user, but say next time, please > give me a few days, at least a week (or whatever a dev feels comfortable > with for that package, again, it'll vary) -- if it's /just/ a bump > request. If I take over a week (or whatever), then maybe I need > reminding, so let me know! OTOH, if the bug includes "I tried bumping the > last ebuild to use the new sources and it worked fine", or "... and it > broke at ", that's far more valuable than just a bump request, > and I'd treat it so. (In fact, that sounds like possible AT/HT material, > maybe ultimately leading to a new dev, to me.) bingo. a bug for bumping because their edges aren't bloody enough, bah, it'll get done just as soon as i can, but not before then, probably in the next week or so. now a version bump bug because it fixes an actual BUG, ping me, that i'll avoid coffee breaks (actually...that's not a good thing to do...) and sleep to get it in and working. I'm with this Duncan on this one (and someone said the way i couldn't manage in my other drafts :) ~mcummings signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On 2/13/06, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: But... If INVALID is renamed, could we get a new GOAWAY resolution for people who really deserve it? Like others here, I've also felt a bit stunned at an INVALID bug. Personally, I don't think anything needs to be renamed, but I would like to see a simple, short comment about why such a decision was made. This adds a bit more time for people handling the bugs, but it saves confusion on the part of the person bugging, more time for an explanation to be given when/if the person asks why it was marked the way it was, and creating a whole host of new, specific tags. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On 13-02-2006 21:02:28 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote: > On Monday 13 February 2006 20:29, Grobian wrote: > > Maybe that has to change then? Like getting more bug wranglers that > > also handle canned responses as a first-line helpdesk? > > Wrangle bugs a few months and you'll see how hard it can be to stay friendly > sometimes... That's what I said two posts ago. -- Fabian Groffen -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Monday 13 February 2006 20:29, Grobian wrote: > Maybe that has to change then? Like getting more bug wranglers that > also handle canned responses as a first-line helpdesk? Wrangle bugs a few months and you'll see how hard it can be to stay friendly sometimes... And no, bugzilla is not a helpdesk. We have mailing lists and forums.g.o for this. btw.: I think the idea to give someone credit for requesting a version bump is pretty much ridiculous. There're helpful requests/bug reports, where credit is due, but the usual case of a request for a new version isn't. Carsten pgpRt7TKZBV5m.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Monday 13 February 2006 19:49, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > They also deserve it if they stick it in their CXXFLAGS... In that case even more, as it actually does something: break stuff. -- Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/ Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE pgpfahXwtGVQg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On 13-02-2006 19:21:57 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:07:51 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > | If these frustrations get so apparent that they require a solution > | flag in Bugzilla for a developer, then it might be a better solution > | to just leave the bugzilla work to someone else and try to work a bit > | more away from the users for a while. > > Most of us don't have the luxury of being able to ignore real users... Maybe that has to change then? Like getting more bug wranglers that also handle canned responses as a first-line helpdesk? -- Fabian Groffen -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 20:07:51 +0100 Grobian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | If these frustrations get so apparent that they require a solution | flag in Bugzilla for a developer, then it might be a better solution | to just leave the bugzilla work to someone else and try to work a bit | more away from the users for a while. Most of us don't have the luxury of being able to ignore real users... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On 13-02-2006 18:49:18 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:39:06 +0100 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | NOTABUG sounds good, but as Ciaran said, we need another replacement > | for those bugs who really deserve it. If a user sticks > | -fvisibility=hidden into his CFLAGS (instead of CXXFLAGS), > | PLEASEGOAWAYKTHXBYE would be much more appropriate. > > They also deserve it if they stick it in their CXXFLAGS... I don't agree on such solution, because getting rid of personal frustrations of a developer should *not* be supported by Gentoo's Bugzilla. These kind of emotions give a rather weak signal, and do not really show any kind of profesionalism IMHO. If these frustrations get so apparent that they require a solution flag in Bugzilla for a developer, then it might be a better solution to just leave the bugzilla work to someone else and try to work a bit more away from the users for a while. It is a well known issue that people who have to work with others get frustrated (e.g. call-center employees). -- Fabian Groffen -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Mon, Feb 13, 2006 at 02:00:48PM -0500, Patrick McLean wrote: > > How about RICER or RICERFLAGS :) +1. "RESOLVED RICER" has such a nice ring to it :) -- Marien. pgp70IcstDKz0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:39:06 +0100 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | Are you being serious about this? > > Sadly, even if he is, there're enough people around here that're taking > that kind of thought seriously (see, for example, my sarcastic post on > the 0day -core thread that so many people took as genuine)... > > | NOTABUG sounds good, but as Ciaran said, we need another replacement > | for those bugs who really deserve it. If a user sticks > | -fvisibility=hidden into his CFLAGS (instead of CXXFLAGS), > | PLEASEGOAWAYKTHXBYE would be much more appropriate. > > They also deserve it if they stick it in their CXXFLAGS... > How about RICER or RICERFLAGS :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFD8NdgWt/XSf2CZdkRAlUQAJ99NlKvRVK3zvqX+R8iZH07LvTpoACfS+sW EtylhPAKUZ9qaxm6Jv3o1gk= =UDkC -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 19:39:06 +0100 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Are you being serious about this? Sadly, even if he is, there're enough people around here that're taking that kind of thought seriously (see, for example, my sarcastic post on the 0day -core thread that so many people took as genuine)... | NOTABUG sounds good, but as Ciaran said, we need another replacement | for those bugs who really deserve it. If a user sticks | -fvisibility=hidden into his CFLAGS (instead of CXXFLAGS), | PLEASEGOAWAYKTHXBYE would be much more appropriate. They also deserve it if they stick it in their CXXFLAGS... -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
Duncan wrote: > Consider this: INVALID is strong enough, under the wrong circumstances, > that it /could/ set an emotionally unstable user off, causing them to > commit suicide or something. I /know/ it was deeply depressing here, > that first time, altho the effect on me would have been to simply push me > back to Mandrake and cause me to become another anti-Gentoo activist, as I > wasn't already suicidal. Some people /might/ be! One never knows the > emotional state of someone filing a bug, so consider carefully the effect > INVALIDating the bug might possibly have on their entire life. Would > /you/ want that on your conscience, that it had been /your/ action, the > marking of that one last bug they filed as INVALID, that finally tipped > them over? I know I wouldn't! Are you being serious about this? I dont' find it particularly funny in case it's a joke. In case it's not, i find it ridiculous. If a person is that emotionally unstable that he'd commit suicide because of an INVALID resolution, he'd probably commit suicide everytime only the slightest negative event occurs too. I really feel sorry for those people who are depressive, but I wouldn't feel guilty because I closed a bug as INVALID instead of WORKSFORME. > Obviously, I like the idea of NOTABUG better, or consider using WORKSFORME > or WONTFIX. Those get the same general message across, without having the > implication of INVALIDating the user's bug, possibly/likely conveying the > message that they are not welcome as a Gentoo user, or worse yet to > someone already unstable, that their whole life is INVALID. NOTABUG sounds good, but as Ciaran said, we need another replacement for those bugs who really deserve it. If a user sticks -fvisibility=hidden into his CFLAGS (instead of CXXFLAGS), PLEASEGOAWAYKTHXBYE would be much more appropriate. -- Simon Stelling Gentoo/AMD64 Operational Co-Lead [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On 2/13/06, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But... If INVALID is renamed, could we get a new GOAWAY resolution for > people who really deserve it? I would tend to agree with this. I myself was the 'victim' of an aggressively worded INVALID resolution to a bug report I filed due to my screwing up an upgrade to java 1.5. Even though I didn't particularly /like/ the response, I did learn that: 1. It was my own fault. 2. I needed to be really damn sure about future bug reports, particularly when I unmask things! So even if INVALID is watered down to be gentle to new (or easily offended) users, you do occasionally need to smack abusers or people who should know better (like me). -Richard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
Duncan wrote: I'd /not/ really wish to encourage version bump requests "overnight". That's jumping the gun, and indeed, could encourage "first post" like behavior. What I'd do with such bugs is thank the user, but say next time, please give me a few days, at least a week (or whatever a dev feels comfortable with for that package, again, it'll vary) -- if it's /just/ a bump request. That is precisely what was being discussed on the private list which prompted me to finish off this post and publish it. One point I was trying to make (as Mike and myself suggested on the private list) is that if you *do* receive a bump request too soon after release, then you ask the user nicely to wait 1 week (or whatever) after release in the future before filing bump requests. You should *also* leave the bug open until the ebuild is in portage, then mark the bug as FIXED in the normal way, *and* you thank them by name in the commit message. By showing them some basic respect for the fact they were trying to contribute, hopefully they will understand your position better and take up your advice. You can argue that that *may* encourage "overnight" bump requests (which certainly isn't the intention), but in practice I think that won't happen too much if you treat the contributor in the proper manner. Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
Daniel Drake posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Sun, 12 Feb 2006 23:24:45 +: > Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: [Danial Drake wrote...] >>> 3. Always record contributions by name >>> >>> If you commit something in response to a bug report that has been filed, >>> always thank the user by full name (and bug number) in the ChangeLog and >>> commit message. >>> >>> This also applies for [...] version bump requests/submissions. Might >>> sound pointless for 'trivial' reports/requests but it is important to >>> credit the user if they have gone to the trouble of filing a bug. >> >> I don't really get this part. Why should I give credit to someone else >> for providing a fix for a bug which I already fixed myself locally? > > Maybe not if you have already done the work. I was thinking more of the > scenario, upstream does a release. You are on the mailing list so you > know about the new version. You decide you'll bump it in portage > tomorrow. > > Overnight, someone files a request for a version bump. Maybe they attach > a new ebuild or state that the existing one needs bumping. > > Even though you knew about it, I was suggesting that you credit the user > for filing the bug. I don't recall where I read it, but it sounded reasonable to me then, and deals with a possible issue, so I'll repeat it. Somewhere I read a recommendation for bump requests, addressed to users thinking of making one, suggesting that they give the devs a week or two to do the bump themselves, as they likely know about it because they are following the list for that app, since they are the Gentoo maintainer for it, and just need time to get something worked up and tested locally. If after two weeks, the bump isn't in portage, /then/ it's time to post the bug about it. Now, two weeks may be a bit long, but I'd say a week, anyway, of course depending on the app (something big like gcc or gnome/kde bumps would be different, but they are often in the tree even before the package is publicly released and sources publicly available -- good job!). I'd /not/ really wish to encourage version bump requests "overnight". That's jumping the gun, and indeed, could encourage "first post" like behavior. What I'd do with such bugs is thank the user, but say next time, please give me a few days, at least a week (or whatever a dev feels comfortable with for that package, again, it'll vary) -- if it's /just/ a bump request. If I take over a week (or whatever), then maybe I need reminding, so let me know! OTOH, if the bug includes "I tried bumping the last ebuild to use the new sources and it worked fine", or "... and it broke at ", that's far more valuable than just a bump request, and I'd treat it so. (In fact, that sounds like possible AT/HT material, maybe ultimately leading to a new dev, to me.) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
On Sun, 12 Feb 2006 15:53:37 -0700 Duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Consider this: INVALID is strong enough, under the wrong | circumstances, that it /could/ set an emotionally unstable user off, | causing them to commit suicide or something. Some people go around setting fire to embassies when they don't understand a joke. Doesn't mean we should care about or cater to such people. INVALID doesn't necessarily mean it was wrong for the user to file the bug. Heck, I've closed the occasional bug as INVALID (and sometimes have even had the reporter do it) after massive debugging sessions and discussions that go on for dozens of pages. But... If INVALID is renamed, could we get a new GOAWAY resolution for people who really deserve it? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
Duncan wrote: 2. Be careful with INVALID resolutions The term invalid _is_ harsh in bugzilla context, so make sure you write a quick thankful-sounding comment to go with it. I like all the suggestions, but this one hits a particular sore spot, as I had it happen to me, with I think my second Gentoo bug filing. I'm glad that you can relate to it - reassures me that I'm not pulling this out of thin air :) > What made things worse is that the filing was after my arch team had asked for volunteers to perform specific tests (multilib-strict), and I had gone to significant effort to do so, having builds die that would otherwise have completed successfully. As it happens, the bug /was/ valid, and was eventually resolved That's another issue which is worth thinking about. I'm just as bad at this myself - if I can close a bug report without doing any work (i.e. the case for most INVALID bugs) then it's almost like a small personal victory. We should also try not to jump the gun so much in this kind of situation. Thanks for the feedback, if bugzilla ever drives you to suicide I will be sure to file a bug report at the official Bugzilla bugzilla so that it can be corrected :) Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: Bugzilla etiquette suggestions
Daniel Drake posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:11:33 +: > 2. Be careful with INVALID resolutions > > The term invalid _is_ harsh in bugzilla context, so make sure you write > a quick thankful-sounding comment to go with it. I like all the suggestions, but this one hits a particular sore spot, as I had it happen to me, with I think my second Gentoo bug filing. What made things worse is that the filing was after my arch team had asked for volunteers to perform specific tests (multilib-strict), and I had gone to significant effort to do so, having builds die that would otherwise have completed successfully. As it happens, the bug /was/ valid, and was eventually resolved (impressively quickly, I might add =8^) when I refiled it when the next version came out. I had something inadvised in my CFLAGS that the developer had seized upon as an opportunity to mark the bug invalid and get it out of his way, that in reality had nothing to do with the bug (a 64-bit shared object installed to lib instead of lib64, independent of CFLAGS, inadvised or not). Calling the bug "invalid" can be taken personally as saying the opinion and work that the user put into getting and filing the bug was "invalid", therefore, that the user shouldn't bother spending his time on Gentoo at all, as they don't matter and they and there opinion are "invalid". Consider this: INVALID is strong enough, under the wrong circumstances, that it /could/ set an emotionally unstable user off, causing them to commit suicide or something. I /know/ it was deeply depressing here, that first time, altho the effect on me would have been to simply push me back to Mandrake and cause me to become another anti-Gentoo activist, as I wasn't already suicidal. Some people /might/ be! One never knows the emotional state of someone filing a bug, so consider carefully the effect INVALIDating the bug might possibly have on their entire life. Would /you/ want that on your conscience, that it had been /your/ action, the marking of that one last bug they filed as INVALID, that finally tipped them over? I know I wouldn't! Obviously, I like the idea of NOTABUG better, or consider using WORKSFORME or WONTFIX. Those get the same general message across, without having the implication of INVALIDating the user's bug, possibly/likely conveying the message that they are not welcome as a Gentoo user, or worse yet to someone already unstable, that their whole life is INVALID. Thanks, Daniel! -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
