bug#36560: Add comment when closing bugs to show it was not by accident

bug#36560: Add comment when closing bugs to show it was not by accident

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I see bugs are now just closed without comment these days.
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=34307
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=34311
If a comment is added, we can tell if they were closed by accident or not. 

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report.

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> writes:

> Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report.

The bugs in question were already marked as "wontfix".  Closing.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#36560: Add comment when closing bugs to show it was not by accident

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson
>  <jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 19:49:07 +0800
> 
> I see bugs are now just closed without comment these days.
> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=34307
> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=34311
> If a comment is added, we can tell if they were closed by accident or not. 

They were both tagged "wontfix", which explains the reason nicely, I
think.

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson
>  <jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 20:02:47 +0800
> 
> Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report.

Of course, it is.  You can see in the bug Web page that the request to
tag the bug was from a person, not from am machine.

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

I'm saying one could use the bts(1) command and fire off the same
wontfix + close commands to a long list of bug numbers.

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org>
> Cc: 36560@debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2019 23:16:34 +0800
> 
> I'm saying one could use the bts(1) command and fire off the same
> wontfix + close commands to a long list of bug numbers.

Why would you assume we do such nasty things?

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[積丹尼 Dan Jacobson]

Also on Debian, the user doesn't have to check the web to find out why a
bug was closed. Here he just gets a message that it was closed.

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

積丹尼 Dan Jacobson <jidanni@jidanni.org> writes:

> Also on Debian, the user doesn't have to check the web to find out why a
> bug was closed. Here he just gets a message that it was closed.

Sure:

M-: (gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group 36560)

:-)

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Stefan Kangas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 375 bytes --]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> > Also on Debian, the user doesn't have to check the web to find out why a
> > bug was closed. Here he just gets a message that it was closed.
>
> Sure:
>
> M-: (gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group 36560)
>
> :-)

Nifty!  Would it perhaps be useful to add that to
etc/admin/bug-triage (see attached patch)?

Thanks,
Stefan Kangas

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-admin-notes-bug-triage-New-section-Tips-and-tricks-..patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1253 bytes --]

From 7da39da58c9ecd2d8dff384dbbae0f01d5540e11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:44:07 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] * admin/notes/bug-triage: New section "Tips and tricks".
 (Bug#36560)

---
 admin/notes/bug-triage | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)

diff --git a/admin/notes/bug-triage b/admin/notes/bug-triage
index 2974eee179..c105f06c55 100644
--- a/admin/notes/bug-triage
+++ b/admin/notes/bug-triage
@@ -104,3 +104,21 @@ according to the communication flow.  Red bugs mean that nobody has
 answered, these bugs need primary attention.  Green bugs flag that
 there is a recent communication about, and orange bugs flag that the
 bug hasn't been touched for at least two weeks.
+
+* Tips and tricks
+
+** Show individual bug report in web browser.
+
+To see the bug report for Bug#123 in a web browser, visit the URL:
+
+   https://debbugs.gnu.org/123
+
+** Show individual bug report in Emacs.
+
+To display the bug report for Bug#123 in emacs:
+
+   (require 'gnus-group)  ; Make sure its loaded
+   (gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group 123)
+
+This is equivalent to displaying it using the debbugs package above,
+but only works for individual bug reports.
-- 
2.11.0

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> Nifty!  Would it perhaps be useful to add that to
> etc/admin/bug-triage (see attached patch)?

I think so.

> +* Tips and tricks
> +
> +** Show individual bug report in web browser.
> +
> +To see the bug report for Bug#123 in a web browser, visit the URL:
> +
> +   https://debbugs.gnu.org/123
> +
> +** Show individual bug report in Emacs.
> +
> +To display the bug report for Bug#123 in emacs:
> +
> +   (require 'gnus-group)  ; Make sure its loaded

I've now added an autoload cookie to the command so that this isn't
necessary -- it's a command that can be used without using any other
parts of Gnus, so I think that makes sense.

> +   (gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group 123)
> +
> +This is equivalent to displaying it using the debbugs package above,
> +but only works for individual bug reports.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Stefan Kangas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 372 bytes --]

Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:

> > +   (require 'gnus-group)  ; Make sure its loaded
>
> I've now added an autoload cookie to the command so that this isn't
> necessary -- it's a command that can be used without using any other
> parts of Gnus, so I think that makes sense.

Thanks.  I've attached an updated patch without the require.

Thanks,
Stefan Kangas

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-admin-notes-bug-triage-New-section-Tips-and-tricks-..patch --]
[-- Type: application/x-patch, Size: 1202 bytes --]

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Basil L. Contovounesios]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> diff --git a/admin/notes/bug-triage b/admin/notes/bug-triage
> index 2974eee179..1170e29d2e 100644
> --- a/admin/notes/bug-triage
> +++ b/admin/notes/bug-triage
> @@ -104,3 +104,20 @@ according to the communication flow.  Red bugs mean that nobody has
>  answered, these bugs need primary attention.  Green bugs flag that
>  there is a recent communication about, and orange bugs flag that the
>  bug hasn't been touched for at least two weeks.
> +
> +* Tips and tricks
> +
> +** Show individual bug report in web browser.
> +
> +To see the bug report for Bug#123 in a web browser, visit the URL:
> +
> +   https://debbugs.gnu.org/123
> +
> +** Show individual bug report in Emacs.
> +
> +To display the bug report for Bug#123 in emacs:

Nit: The second "emacs" should probably be capitalised.

> +   (gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group 123)

Is M-x notation preferred?  (I don't mind.)

> +This is equivalent to displaying it using the debbugs package above,
> +but only works for individual bug reports.

FWIW, the Debbugs URL format and M-x gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group
trick are already described in admin/notes/bugtracker, which is
referenced at the start of bug-triage:

  This document just describes the procedure of triaging bugs, for
  information on how to work with the bug tracker, see the bugtracker
  file in this same directory for the basics.  You can also install the
  debbugs ELPA package for access to M-x debbugs-gnu, an emacs interface
  to debbugs, and M-x debbugs-org, an emacs interface via org-mode.

But I don't mind if bug-triage summarises the same information.

Thanks,

-- 
Basil

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Stefan Kangas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 801 bytes --]

Basil L. Contovounesios <contovob@tcd.ie> writes:

> FWIW, the Debbugs URL format and M-x gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group
> trick are already described in admin/notes/bugtracker, which is
> referenced at the start of bug-triage:

Dang, you are correct.  Maybe it's not a good idea to duplicate information
(lest one of the locations will fall out of sync with the other).

But the bugtracker file makes it sound like you need to be a Gnus user to use
M-x gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group, which is a bit misleading.  It also
doesn't mention how to view a bug in its "Quick-start guide".

The attached patch tries to fix the above two issues by adding a new section
"How do I read a bug?" to the "Quick-start guide" with both of these methods
covered.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Stefan Kangas

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Add-new-section-on-reading-a-bug-to-admin-notes-bugt.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 1020 bytes --]

From 44593b7111fbea00c011b6359c71b1454dfd24df Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 18:44:07 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Add new section on reading a bug to admin/notes/bugtracker

* admin/notes/bugtracker: New section "How do I read a bug?" in
"Quickstart". (Bug#36560)
---
 admin/notes/bugtracker | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/admin/notes/bugtracker b/admin/notes/bugtracker
index 92ae326ffd..b890b89166 100644
--- a/admin/notes/bugtracker
+++ b/admin/notes/bugtracker
@@ -11,6 +11,10 @@ Use M-x report-emacs-bug, or send mail to bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org.
 If you want to Cc someone, use an "X-Debbugs-Cc" header (or
 pseudo-header, see below) instead.
 
+** How do I read a bug?
+Visit https://debbugs.gnu.org/123 in your web browser or try this in
+Emacs: M-x gnus-read-ephemeral-emacs-bug-group.
+
 ** How do I comment on a bug?
 Reply to a mail on the bug-gnu-emacs list in the normal way.
 Or send a mail to 123@debbugs.gnu.org.
-- 
2.11.0

bug#36560: Adding tags is not proof that anybody actually read the bug report

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Stefan Kangas <stefan@marxist.se> writes:

> The attached patch tries to fix the above two issues by adding a new section
> "How do I read a bug?" to the "Quick-start guide" with both of these methods
> covered.
>
> What do you think?

Looks good to me; applied.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no