From webmaster at ubuntu.com Thu May 4 16:01:54 2017 From: webmaster at ubuntu.com (Help Ubuntu) Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 16:01:54 -0000 Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BCommunity_Help_Wiki=5D_Update_of_=22ReportingBugs=22_by_es20?= =?utf-8?q?490446e?= Message-ID: <20170504160154.26305.26835@jostaberry.canonical.com> Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Community Help Wiki" for change notification. The "ReportingBugs" page has been changed by es20490446e: http://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs?action=diff&rev1=301&rev2=302 * [[https://translations.launchpad.net/ubuntu|Reporting misspells]] - == For windowed applications == + == Reporting windowed applications == In the Terminal application enter: ||ubuntu-bug -w|| - == For non windowed applications == + == Reporting non windowed applications == 1. Using the '''Synaptic''' application and the [[https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Bugs/FindRightPackage|list of common packages]], determine which software package is the most likely to be affected. @@ -48, +48 @@ ||ubuntu-bug|| - == For offline systems == + == Reporting offline systems == If the system internet does't work, do the following: @@ -66, +66 @@ ||ubuntu-bug -c FILE|| - == For unusable systems == + == Reporting unusable systems == Only if you system '''doesn't fit''' any of the above methods, go to: From noreply at ubuntu.com Thu May 25 20:13:31 2017 From: noreply at ubuntu.com (Ubuntu Wiki) Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 20:13:31 -0000 Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BUbuntu_Wiki=5D_Update_of_=22LibreOfficeBugWrangling=22_by_pe?= =?utf-8?q?nalvch?= Message-ID: <20170525201331.26529.819@mangaba.canonical.com> Dear Wiki user, You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Ubuntu Wiki" for change notification. The "LibreOfficeBugWrangling" page has been changed by penalvch: http://wiki.ubuntu.com/LibreOfficeBugWrangling?action=diff&rev1=32&rev2=33 Comment: Clarified app crash but OS functional debugging steps. == LibreOffice crashes but system still functional == + This is when !LibreOffice crashes, but one may still continue to use the OS. - For instances when only !LibreOffice crashes but you can still use the OS without hard rebooting: - * Please consult https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Apport to ensure Apport is enabled. - * Please make sure !LibreOffice debug symbol packages are installed: + 1. Please make sure the !LibreOffice debug symbol packages are installed: * libreoffice-dbg * uno-libs3-dbg * ure-dbg + 1. Please file a crash report via the apport process. Instructions on this are available from [[https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Apport]]. - * If this happened while a particular document was open or you were manipulating the document in a certain way, please attach that document to the bug report with detailed, click-for-click steps on how to reproduce the crash. + 1. If this happened while a particular document was open or you were manipulating the document in a certain way, please attach that document to the bug report with detailed, click-for-click steps on how to reproduce the crash. - * For suspected GUI/desktop environment driven crashes (ex. reproducible in Kubuntu but not Xubuntu), please remove the following packages and comment on if this changes anything: + 1. For suspected GUI/desktop environment driven crashes (ex. reproducible in Kubuntu but not Xubuntu), please remove the following packages and comment on if this changes anything: * libreoffice-gtk * libreoffice-gnome * libreoffice-gtk3 * libreoffice-kde + 1. Only if it is confirmed apport is enabled, but the crash isn't captured, please capture the crash manually following [[https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash]]. Once captured, please file a bug report manually via [[https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/libreoffice/+filebug]]. == The Whole system hangs or boots to the login screen == From es20490446e at gmail.com Sun May 28 14:54:45 2017 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 16:54:45 +0200 Subject: I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> Message-ID: <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> About: (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs) (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs) Sorry, but I'm absolutely convinced that the latest draft I've written is really what's needed. The sections clearly reflect every use case, and they are organised in a logical way. The writing style is conversational and easy to understand. The content is exactly what the user is looking for, and adding something else won't ease their job nor change their behaviour. If there's something useful to somebody else, it should go somewhere else. The imagery suggests the page is easygoing, softens it, and makes it more memorable. There's nothing impolite about it, neither gives the wrong image of Ubuntu. The community isn't targeted to super professionals but to all kinds of people, many of which are student in their teens. So either you take it as it is, or you leave what you have. I will wait till Sunday the 4th, to let you decide yourselves. I will take that resolution as hard fact on what to expect in the future. I'm looking forward to work only with people who are in complete sympathy and harmony with my purpose, which is "easy and straightforward over correct". Thank you. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4747 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From hggdh2 at ubuntu.com Sun May 28 15:27:15 2017 From: hggdh2 at ubuntu.com (C de-Avillez) Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 10:27:15 -0500 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> On Sun, 28 May 2017 16:54:45 +0200 Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: NB: I have not yet *read* the new proposal. I am just discussing the approach here. > About: > (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs) > (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs) > > Sorry, but I'm absolutely convinced that the latest draft I've > written is really what's needed. Alberto, during this thread you were asked why would you want to have a discussion of the changes in private conversations. You stated something suggesting "I can then submit something more complete [to be discussed by the community]. Now you come back absolutely convinced whatever you did (keep in mind I did not read it yet, I am just discussing form and approach) is THE ANSWER. I do not know if it is or not. But I can say you are approaching it in a less than ideal way. > The sections clearly reflect every use case, and they are organised > in a logical way. The writing style is conversational and easy to > understand. > The content is exactly what the user is looking for, and adding > something else won't ease their job nor change their behaviour. If > there's something useful to somebody else, it should go somewhere > else. Just a question: and what it is we -- the community of bug triagers/solvers/developers are looking for? Are our requirements fulfilled? Remember, there are *always* [at least] two sides involved. You "exactly what the user is looking for". Great. What is it we -- maintainers/developers -- are looking for? Are our requirements/needs addressed? > The imagery suggests the page is easygoing, softens it, and makes it > more memorable. There's nothing impolite about it, neither gives the > wrong image of Ubuntu. > The community isn't targeted to super professionals but to all kinds > of people, many of which are student in their teens. > So either you take it as it is, or you leave what you have. I will > wait till Sunday the 4th, to let you decide yourselves. I will take > that resolution as hard fact on what to expect in the future. The above sounds like "either you pay me the ransom, or I will kill the hostages." A perfect example of ultimatum. > I'm looking forward to work only with people who are in complete > sympathy and harmony with my purpose, which is "easy and > straightforward over correct". This is the wrong approach. This is the absolutely WRONG approach. What you are saying here is equivalent to "I am looking forward to work only with people that /think like I think/." This will not happen. This will *never* happen. Everybody has a (perhaps just slightly) different approach/view/way of coping/interest/whatever. Even more importantly, if I am surrounded only with people that think like I think, all I have is reinforcing of my own bias and prejudices. Yes, there will also be reinforcing of the *good* ideas, but there is no way to KNOW if they are good or not, since nobody in the group will have a different view. > Thank you. and thank you. ..C.. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From ubuntu at jonasdiekmann.de Sun May 28 20:07:34 2017 From: ubuntu at jonasdiekmann.de (Vej) Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 22:07:34 +0200 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hello Alberto, I really like the idea of a shorter manual for Bug Triaging, because the current one was hard to follow as a newbie. But I really dislike the way how you try to press others in accepting it as it is without modifications when writing this: Am 28.05.2017 um 16:54 schrieb Alberto Salvia Novella: > So either you take it as it is, or you leave what you have. I will wait till Sunday the 4th, to let you decide yourselves. I will take that resolution as hard fact on what to expect in the future. This is not a good way to communicate with a team of volunteers. It also goes against the Ubuntu Code of Conduct [1]. So please sit back take a breath, drop that "everything or nothing"-approach and open yourself for discussion how to realize a clear manual without loosing details that some of us might need for their work (think about the Kernel Team as one example). I feel this is the only way your great goal of an easier manual might become reality. Best Regards Vej [1] "Our work will be used by other people, and we in turn will depend on the work of others. Any decision we take will affect users and colleagues, and we should consider them when making decisions." (Cited from the "Ubuntu Code of Conduct v2.0" From marconifabio at hotmail.it Sun May 28 16:18:16 2017 From: marconifabio at hotmail.it (Fabio Marconi) Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 16:18:16 +0000 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: Hi Alby What ..C.. just say to you shown the great admiration he has for U. We all thanks U for your effort in this community, and pls, keep his replies as suggestions to be a better man. Thank U, Alby. Thank U, ..C.. Inviato da BlueMail Il giorno 28 mag 2017, alle ore 17:27, C de-Avillez > ha scritto: On Sun, 28 May 2017 16:54:45 +0200 Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: NB: I have not yet *read* the new proposal. I am just discussing the approach here. About: (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs) (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs) Sorry, but I'm absolutely convinced that the latest draft I've written is really what's needed. Alberto, during this thread you were asked why would you want to have a discussion of the changes in private conversations. You stated something suggesting "I can then submit something more complete [to be discussed by the community]. Now you come back absolutely convinced whatever you did (keep in mind I did not read it yet, I am just discussing form and approach) is THE ANSWER. I do not know if it is or not. But I can say you are approaching it in a less than ideal way. The sections clearly reflect every use case, and they are organised in a logical way. The writing style is conversational and easy to understand. The content is exactly what the user is looking for, and adding something else won't ease their job nor change their behaviour. If there's something useful to somebody else, it should go somewhere else. Just a question: and what it is we -- the community of bug triagers/solvers/developers are looking for? Are our requirements fulfilled? Remember, there are *always* [at least] two sides involved. You "exactly what the user is looking for". Great. What is it we -- maintainers/developers -- are looking for? Are our requirements/needs addressed? The imagery suggests the page is easygoing, softens it, and makes it more memorable. There's nothing impolite about it, neither gives the wrong image of Ubuntu. The community isn't targeted to super professionals but to all kinds of people, many of which are student in their teens. So either you take it as it is, or you leave what you have. I will wait till Sunday the 4th, to let you decide yourselves. I will take that resolution as hard fact on what to expect in the future. The above sounds like "either you pay me the ransom, or I will kill the hostages." A perfect example of ultimatum. I'm looking forward to work only with people who are in complete sympathy and harmony with my purpose, which is "easy and straightforward over correct". This is the wrong approach. This is the absolutely WRONG approach. What you are saying here is equivalent to "I am looking forward to work only with people that /think like I think/." This will not happen. This will *never* happen. Everybody has a (perhaps just slightly) different approach/view/way of coping/interest/whatever. Even more importantly, if I am surrounded only with people that think like I think, all I have is reinforcing of my own bias and prejudices. Yes, there will also be reinforcing of the *good* ideas, but there is no way to KNOW if they are good or not, since nobody in the group will have a different view. Thank you. and thank you. ..C.. ________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol Post to : ubuntu-bugcontrol at lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-bugcontrol More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hggdh2 at ubuntu.com Tue May 30 01:49:45 2017 From: hggdh2 at ubuntu.com (C de-Avillez) Date: Mon, 29 May 2017 20:49:45 -0500 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20170529204945.176b9b11.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> On Sun, 28 May 2017 16:54:45 +0200 Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > About: > (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs) > (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs) OK, let's get thru the proposed page. I will be copying text from the proposed Reporting Bugs so that I can comment. The version I am using is #32, timestamped 2017-05-27 22:38:52. Text copied will have the usual "> " we see on replies (well, at least *I* see on my text emails. I do not know what/how it is shown on HTML/richText). * 1. Etiquette > If you care about an Ubuntu release not having bugs, test the daily > image five months before launch. So developers have time to fix it. Why 5 months before? Our release cycle is *still* 6 months. If we test an image 5 months before release, we will be testing pre-alpha code. * how are people -- non-technical people -- going to test it? Something that is, 5 months before release, pre-alpha? * should they only test the code as is 5 months before release? > If writing more doesn't make a tangible difference, write less. We need context. If fact, the sentence above is a good example of why writing *less* does not always help. > If you have any doubt, you can ask any time. I absolutely agree. 100%. All for it. Always. But... My issue here is the word "ask", above, is a link to mailing to the ubuntu-quality ML. Nothing else. But the ubuntu-quality mailing list is NOT the only resource available for people in doubt. There are also: * IRC * The Ubuntu fora (https://ubuntuforums.org) * AskUbuntu (https://askubuntu.com/) * the answers section on Launchpad (https://answers.launchpad.net/) * the ubuntu-users mailing list * the Ubuntu documentation (https://help.ubuntu.com/) * and MANY other mailing lists. To limit to ONE source for answers really does not help. At all. And it is not even the most important source for bugs/issues/support. 2. Not Bugs > Reporting misspells But a misspell *is* a bug. Why wouldn't a mispell be reported? 3. Reporting windowed aplications > In the Terminal application enter: > > ubuntu-bug -w Ah, OK. And then this ubuntu-bug thingie will magically find the bug I want to report, right? Oh, it will not? what should I do then? 4. Reporting non windowed applications > 1. Using the Synaptic application and the list of common packages, > determine which software package is the most likely to be affected. But synaptic is no longer installed by default. How is a casual user going to *know* that, and how would this casual user get synaptic installed? Are there other options? What are they? 5. Reporting unusable systems Now we have, as far as I am concerned, a real issue. As I have already stated, we do not simply need more bugs, we need *good*, *workable*, bugs. Our experience with free bug entry was horrible. many of the bugs entered were unworkable. This was why the free bug entry was removed from view. -x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x- This is one reason of why reporting bugs is so complicated. It is not *easy* to report a bug. Keep in mind that a bug report is a *technical* report of a software defect. If one does not know what a bug is (hint: a bug is a defect in a program/package), why should one be able to enter *anything* as a bug? If one does not know if the bad experience just had is, or is not, a bug, then one would be better served by going to the community support areas I pointed above. If necessary, after being helped by somebody else in the community -- and if determined to be a bug -- then a bug may be opened. But know, at least, we have a good chance of knowing the correct package name, and other important details to be reported. Cheers, ..C.. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From es20490446e at gmail.com Tue May 30 18:33:34 2017 From: es20490446e at gmail.com (Alberto Salvia Novella) Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 20:33:34 +0200 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: <254cd8b0-22ce-8dd8-6a0b-46a671386354@gmail.com> Sorry but I spend an hour writing an answer to these emails, but even then I ended with something extra long that I think nobody will read or understand. In fact that's what usually happens when I answer in text. On the other hand when I use video in a couple of minutes I'm usually done. I will simply keep those as short as possible. And instead of making a monologue, with all the information, I would simulate an actual conversation. Usually with 10-20 seconds answers. (https://youtu.be/L45EqUl2q4M) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/pkcs7-signature Size: 4747 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature URL: From gunnarhj at ubuntu.com Tue May 30 20:29:15 2017 From: gunnarhj at ubuntu.com (Gunnar Hjalmarsson) Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 22:29:15 +0200 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <254cd8b0-22ce-8dd8-6a0b-46a671386354@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <254cd8b0-22ce-8dd8-6a0b-46a671386354@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 2017-05-30 20:33, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Sorry but I spend an hour writing an answer to these emails, but even > then I ended with something extra long that I think nobody will read > or understand. If you are not able to justify your proposed changes in written text, why would we trust you as a driver of substantial changes to the bugs reporting guide, which consists of written text? -- Gunnar Hjalmarsson https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj From hggdh2 at ubuntu.com Wed May 31 00:43:22 2017 From: hggdh2 at ubuntu.com (C de-Avillez) Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 19:43:22 -0500 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <254cd8b0-22ce-8dd8-6a0b-46a671386354@gmail.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> <20170528102715.21d70d49.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <254cd8b0-22ce-8dd8-6a0b-46a671386354@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20170530194322.277d0f45.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> On Tue, 30 May 2017 20:33:34 +0200 Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > Sorry but I spend an hour writing an answer to these emails, but even > then I ended with something extra long that I think nobody will read > or understand. Writing is easy. Anybody can write. But *good* writing is difficult. We have to try. We have to re-work what was written. We have to change sequence of ideas. We have, at the worst, to consider that all we had written bad enough to be thrown away, and re-start. And, if we publish, we have to be willing to read the critics, and try to improve. But, if we do not try, and persevere, we will never be able to write something that can be understood. I have already, in a previous email in this thread, given you some ideas on how to write. Try them. Research for other tips. Try them. Listen to critics (which, usually, will be a written text). Respond in writing. > In fact that's what usually happens when I answer in text. On the > other hand when I use video in a couple of minutes I'm usually done. But you are *writing* a wiki page. How will you be able to write it if you cannot justify your proposal in writing (H/T to Gunnar Hjalmarsson, good point). [in fact the hat tip above comes to show that *others* can have good insights. I am not infallible. Nobody is.] > I will simply keep those as short as possible. And instead of making > a monologue, with all the information, I would simulate an actual > conversation. Usually with 10-20 seconds answers. > > (https://youtu.be/L45EqUl2q4M) I will not listen to it. If you can *talk* your points, you can as well *listen* to your own speech, and transcribe it. Then you put the transcription in an email and, lo and behold, you have written text. Cheers, ..C.. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From dario.ruellan at gmail.com Tue May 30 23:11:17 2017 From: dario.ruellan at gmail.com (Dario Ruellan) Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 20:11:17 -0300 Subject: [Ubuntu-bugcontrol] I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide In-Reply-To: <20170529204945.176b9b11.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> References: <839c46e1-eacc-0ac0-ef2b-120892e21c22@gmail.com> <20170426220133.076326b9.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <67265f65-fb0a-8ba3-098e-5d1fdc58ba01@canonical.com> <5f36acf1-6514-a7fa-9a3e-b825b18f0dd0@gmail.com> <1814819d-3281-2a43-39db-a963452efdc6@gmail.com> <9e945776-da6c-87d9-a655-c582f7e0c393@gmx.co.uk> <20170511185505.GM4213@murraytwins.com> <20170511185506.21f8f0c3.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> <2c0fadcc-28a6-6337-127d-6cefc7118629@gmail.com> <22d3d29d-0e9a-833f-2d04-cd0df70fedd0@gmail.com> <20170529204945.176b9b11.hggdh2@ubuntu.com> Message-ID: Something I'm missing on those tutorials is the recommendation for search for updates before reporting the bug, just in case the problem is already fixed. Seem important for me, but I like to hear a second opinion about it. On May 29, 2017 10:50 PM, "C de-Avillez" wrote: > On Sun, 28 May 2017 16:54:45 +0200 > Alberto Salvia Novella wrote: > > > About: > > (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs) > > (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/es20490446e/Reporting%20bugs) > > OK, let's get thru the proposed page. > > I will be copying text from the proposed Reporting Bugs so that I can > comment. The version I am using is #32, timestamped 2017-05-27 22:38:52. > > Text copied will have the usual "> " we see on replies (well, at least > *I* see on my text emails. I do not know what/how it is shown on > HTML/richText). > > * 1. Etiquette > > > If you care about an Ubuntu release not having bugs, test the daily > > image five months before launch. So developers have time to fix it. > > Why 5 months before? Our release cycle is *still* 6 months. If we test > an image 5 months before release, we will be testing pre-alpha code. > > * how are people -- non-technical people -- going to test it? > Something that is, 5 months before release, pre-alpha? > * should they only test the code as is 5 months before release? > > > If writing more doesn't make a tangible difference, write less. > > We need context. If fact, the sentence above is a good example of why > writing *less* does not always help. > > > If you have any doubt, you can ask any time. > > I absolutely agree. 100%. All for it. Always. > > But... > > My issue here is the word "ask", above, is a link to mailing to the > ubuntu-quality ML. Nothing else. But the ubuntu-quality mailing list is > NOT the only resource available for people in doubt. There are also: > > * IRC > * The Ubuntu fora (https://ubuntuforums.org) > * AskUbuntu (https://askubuntu.com/) > * the answers section on Launchpad (https://answers.launchpad.net/) > * the ubuntu-users mailing list > * the Ubuntu documentation (https://help.ubuntu.com/) > * and MANY other mailing lists. > > To limit to ONE source for answers really does not help. At all. And it > is not even the most important source for bugs/issues/support. > > 2. Not Bugs > > > Reporting misspells > > But a misspell *is* a bug. Why wouldn't a mispell be reported? > > 3. Reporting windowed aplications > > > In the Terminal application enter: > > > > ubuntu-bug -w > > Ah, OK. And then this ubuntu-bug thingie will magically find the bug I > want to report, right? Oh, it will not? what should I do then? > > 4. Reporting non windowed applications > > > 1. Using the Synaptic application and the list of common packages, > > determine which software package is the most likely to be affected. > > But synaptic is no longer installed by default. How is a casual user > going to *know* that, and how would this casual user get synaptic > installed? Are there other options? What are they? > > 5. Reporting unusable systems > > Now we have, as far as I am concerned, a real issue. As I have already > stated, we do not simply need more bugs, we need *good*, *workable*, > bugs. Our experience with free bug entry was horrible. many of the bugs > entered were unworkable. This was why the free bug entry was removed > from view. > > -x-x-x-x-x-x-x-x- > > This is one reason of why reporting bugs is so complicated. It is not > *easy* to report a bug. Keep in mind that a bug report is a *technical* > report of a software defect. > > If one does not know what a bug is (hint: a bug is a defect in a > program/package), why should one be able to enter *anything* as a bug? > > If one does not know if the bad experience just had is, or is not, a > bug, then one would be better served by going to the community support > areas I pointed above. If necessary, after being helped by somebody else > in the community -- and if determined to be a bug -- then a bug may be > opened. But know, at least, we have a good chance of knowing the correct > package name, and other important details to be reported. > > Cheers, > > ..C.. > > > > > > -- > Ubuntu-quality mailing list > Ubuntu-quality at lists.ubuntu.com > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ > mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: