I have written a draft for the Reporting Bugs guide

[Gunnar Hjalmarsson]

On 2017-04-25 09:43, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> Many people has been complaining through the years about not knowing
> how to report bugs in Ubuntu. I have been asking those people why is
> that, and they usually told me that the reporting bugs guide was too
> long, hard to skim, and nobody would be willing to read it.
>
> It wasn't till I putted a video-tutorial on the top of the page when
> people stopped complaining about it. But that's just a dirty
> work-around and shows that the guide doesn't fit well the average
> user needs.
>
> So for:
> https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs
>
> I have written an improved version:
> ...
> The criteria I have used has been:
> - Adequate for the average person (https://goo.gl/GmzLhb)
> - Fits 95% of cases, and leaves the rare ones out.
> - Easy and straightforward, over correct.
> - Removing the already guided steps by applications themselves.
> - Removing the procedures only interesting for triagers.
> - If something is unclear if it's useful, adding it when it shows to
> be.

On 2017-04-28 04:37, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> I mean this draft is intended to substitute the official reporting
> guide, once agreed.

I see that it's not a draft any longer, but that you actually made the 
changes to <https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs>. The 
changes you made are quite extensive. But there never was any kind of 
consensus, was there?

You converted a rather comprehensive guide to a short style one. At 
<https://help.ubuntu.com/stable/ubuntu-help/report-ubuntu-bug.html> 
there is a variant of 'the short story' which links to ReportingBugs 
with the comment: "For more information about reporting bugs in Ubuntu, 
please read the extensive online documentation." But the extensive 
documentation is gone now, isn't it?

This is what the page looked like before:
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs?action=recall&rev=299

Personally I'd like to see much of what you removed be reinserted. One 
possibility might be to make the page consist of a brief summary at the 
top followed by a more in-depth description.

-- 
Gunnar Hjalmarsson
https://launchpad.net/~gunnarhj