From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id MJQfNbxCtF+ncwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:38:04 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id 4AcZMbxCtF99XgAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:38:04 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 353B294006E for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:38:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:44880 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf8fp-000364-Pi for larch@yhetil.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:38:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38174) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf8f4-0002wP-Dr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:37:15 -0500 Received: from static.rcdrun.com ([95.85.24.50]:37229) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf8f1-0006WI-2R for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:37:14 -0500 Received: from localhost ([::ffff:41.202.241.56]) (AUTH: PLAIN admin, TLS: TLS1.2,256bits,ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by static.rcdrun.com with ESMTPSA id 00000000002C0006.000000005FB44283.00005A09; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:37:07 +0000 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 00:36:45 +0300 From: Jean Louis To: Boruch Baum Subject: Re: Ignored bugs Message-ID: References: <20201117184130.t67oqxhnkw5rwozx@E15-2016.optimum.net> <7ef0ec5a-276e-ace7-5316-e168373295ec@grinta.net> <20201117201554.y5pz2blxiklq673m@E15-2016.optimum.net> <6e794a47-b58f-df7a-7420-e0c74174ac16@grinta.net> <20201117205419.l2mzatdu3fkiwgwt@E15-2016.optimum.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201117205419.l2mzatdu3fkiwgwt@E15-2016.optimum.net> User-Agent: Mutt/2.0 (3d08634) (2020-11-07) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.85.24.50; envelope-from=bugs@gnu.support; helo=static.rcdrun.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/17 15:48:56 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org, Daniele Nicolodi Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -0.51 X-TUID: 7sJuPd1aHK+Q * Boruch Baum [2020-11-17 23:57]: > On 2020-11-17 21:27, Daniele Nicolodi wrote: > > The page that introduces the Emacs bug tracker already reports that this > > ... > > The way emacs users behave isn't to go search and find and read that web > page. It's to perform M-x report-emacs-bug. For people using a command > completion program, while they type they see similar alternatives but > org-mode has gone its own way also in its naming convention for > report-*-bug so its 'submit' function would not appear (nor c nor ffap). > > > mailing list is the right place where to report Org bugs (or feature > > request, as is the case for at least one of the bug you reported), and > > not the Emacs bug tracker. > > That cuts off anyone not wanting to be a subscriber to your mailing list > / not wanting all the clutter of all the other conversations and threads > of your mailing list (I certainly don't). That imposes upon them the > burden of taking the steps to apply to join the list, confirm, post, and > then unsubscribe any time they want to make a contribution or submit a > report. As Org is part of Emacs one has to understand Boruch's point as valid. This means it is part of Emacs and M-x report-emacs-bug should not be ignored. Managers of the mailing list or Org developers could make sure to read those bug reports as well. A cron job to grep report for Org bugs can help there. It is quite clear when user finds out about M-x org-submit-bug-report that such will rather use that. But there is plethora of users who may not find that option and they will simply reach to Help menu to submit the bug. There is menu item Org and Submit bug report. But user may not find that menu item as first thing to reach could be simply "Help" and submit bug report. > But, let's try out your suggested method of reporting. Here I am on your > mailing list, reporting that function org-submit-bug-report should > either be renamed or aliased to something more consistent with function > report-emacs-bug, possibly report-emacs-org-bug. I may join and say I support that alignment with the other function. Personally as Org is part of Emacs, I think it should not have special bug reporting, but it should rather be in M-x report-emacs-bug together. I say this as I see that bugs sent to mailing list may not have its proper action cycles, or proper tracking. But I am unsure of it. You could develop the function report-emacs-bug to have users say clearly it is Org bug. One could detect if user is invoking report-emacs-bug from Org mode and only then ask user "Is this Org mode bug?" and provide that little different instructions for Org mode. As if that it not acceptable I would then propose these functions: M-x report-org-bug and M-x report-emacs-bug As those are more aligned to each other or just as Boruch said. > > You are deliberately ignoring these instructions. What do you expect? > > For one, I expect you to not unjustly impute to me motive, and not to > take that 'what do you expect' attitude with me (or with anyone else). It is good to be considerate for reason that we should be, and to consider good faith especially by those reporting bugs. GNU Kind Communications Guidelines https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html