Call for discussion to clarify the IRC guidelines

[Matt Darcy]

>
> As a fairly inexperienced user of linux and ubuntu with old hardware, I
> ran into the issue of "what is supported" quite frequently, and saw the
> process repeat just as often to others. Since #ubuntu is the most active
> channel, it was always the best place to ask universal questions about
> ubuntu linux, even if I happened to be using xubuntu, the ubuntu+1 beta,
> or trying to compile a third-party-program. The snag seemed to be that
> good intentioned helpers would become frustrated with the problems of a
> new user, and when it finally emerged that you were using something that
> could be supported in other channels, they'd say, "oh, you have to go to
> #x for that." Then I'd watch the same argument unfold:
>
> new user: "but I went there and it was dead!"
> helper: "you just have to be patient"
> new user: "I was, I waited for x minutes, no one answered,"
> helper: "well sorry, you can't get any help here."
> ...
> Which usually ended up in more arguing and disruption until the user
> left or a more experienced helper came around and saw what was going on.

Ubuntu is a channel to support "Ubuntu" not "Linux" the Ubuntu product 
and it's associated software. Your learning to compile software is 
nothing to do with the Ubuntu product therefore why should people giving 
their time to support the Ubuntu product give their time to help you 
learn about "Linux" - more so when other users who are looking for help 
with Ubuntu have attention diverted away from them.

There are plenty of channels on Freenode for advice such as "how do I 
compile a program", ##linux, #linuxhelp, for example, which are also 
used for generic Linux help, support, advice and discussion.  If those 
channels are not active it is not up to Ubuntu to change it's scope to 
accomodate for this, it is up to people to get that channel popular and 
active (however they are very active channels so it's not a problem).

to be blunt, if you are an inexperienced user, why would you be using 
the unsupported beta product, the fact that it comes with a warning 
saying "this product is unsupported and in $X stage of development" 
means by it's very nature, it's not supported and will have problems, 
which suggests unless you are technicaly compentant in resolving these 
issues yourself or in a position to live with / not care about problems 
you shouldn't be using it at this stage, so it's quite insulting for you 
to go into #ubuntu and ask about the beta product ignoring the warnings 
the development community have given to you before you installed it.

>
> I think for sanity's standpoint, #ubuntu should offer support for
> non-canonical software, and that should be mentioned in the topic or
> somewhere else helpers will see. Users should be made aware that they
> should check out other channels for potentially more support, especially
> if there's nothing more that the channel can do for them at the moment,
> but #ubuntu should still be a welcoming place for everyone, not
> somewhere users have to conceal what they're doing from volunteers to
> ask for guidance. Using lubuntu? No problem, we'll help you if we can.
> That's the Ubuntu spirit.

#Ubuntu does support any official Ubuntu release, xubuntu, kubuntu for 
example, however there are specific channels #xbuntu #kubuntu for 
example that have very specialist and experienced members who maybe able 
to help better than an Ubuntu user trying to guide a Kubuntu user 
through a KDE issue for example.

Using lubuntu, ? is it an official Ubuntu release, no, then we don't 
support it, is it an official Ubuntu release - sure, welcome to help.

Why again should the community pickup unofficial software, no matter how 
good it is, that's nothing against unofficial projects, but if they are 
good, they can apply for and will get status within the ubuntu project. 
The definition of official release and supported release (such as EOL 
products) would certainly benifit from a definition on the wiki going 
forward.



In terms of the phrase "supported" as Alan Pope has pointed out very 
reasonably on a few occasions this phrase has various meanings in terms 
of #ubuntu we need to agree on a definition or it's intended message, 
even if some of us disagree on what this means.

To me supported means something the vendor (in this case the project and 
it's support resources) will support and help you with.

I suggest approaching this in the same way as a software or hardware vendor.

Here are the known working, approved configurations, hardware, etc.

this removes a certain level of ambiguity. If you call Symantec up and 
say "I'm trying to run Nortan Antivirus 2000 on Windows 7" - they will 
tell you it's not supported and not help you deal with it, simpley 
because it's a strain on their technical capabilities and it also 
protects them from problems if something goes wrong.

I believe (possibly wrongly) #ubuntu should follow that model and get 
behind the supported methods and technologies, which in turn may help us 
improve the unmaintained and often poor documentation in the wiki, right 
now there are too many 
www.iloveubuntu.com/howto/install-suse-linux-package-on-ubuntu.html type 
urls which poor information and damage, which people tend to use due to 
either not being aware of the official ubuntu documentation and 
supported methods or the fact that the ubuntu documentation is 
poor/outdated. If we take on this supported approach we'd also be at 
some level taking responsability for maintaining and resolving issue 
with the documentation for the official supported products.

I know that seems a harsh stance to take, but a large ammount of the 
issues in #ubuntu based channels are down to self inflicted issues or 
people doing what they "think" is the way to do something, the more we 
push people down the supported path the better the bug reports, testing, 
documentation and overall help will get. If a user is advanced enough to 
compile postfix into a cluster with ldap in multimaster mode for 
authentication, then they are capable enough to do some basic trouble 
shooting, use channels such as #ldap/#postfix/##linux to progress some 
issues and even contact the right people  to get it resolved. (for 
example).

Which leads me onto the family friendly working, for which I totally see 
Robert Walls point of view, I'd again suggest with the opinion above 
using the stance of an asking for support from vendors, but without the 
formality.

You would not pickup the phone to symantic and say "yo my fucking 
Antivirus is screwing my brain, help me fix it NOW !!!!" and if you did, 
the phone would be put down on you.

I think that's a pretty good model to adopt, but obviously less 
formally. The people who work on the project are in essense providing a 
professional support resource in an informal environment and as such 
deserve to be treated professional and respectfully, which ties in with 
the COC.

eg, if someone swears at you, or does the HELP HELP HELP HELP! they are 
politly asked not to continue that and explained how to ask a question, 
if they are persist, they are removed or "the phone is put down" why 
should the person helping have to take that ? why should the channel 
have to see that ? why should other people who have support needs have 
attention diverted from them ?

I may have explained that badly as I'm not suggesting going to a formal 
support process, but using the guideliness of talking to people 
professionally but in a relaxed and informal manner.


That's my starter for 10.

Matt