GNU bug report logs - #10134
24.0.91; Typo, (elisp) `Text from Minibuffer'

Previous Next

Full log

Message #56 received at 10134 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: "'Chong Yidong'" <cyd <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 10134 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 'Bob Proulx' <bob <at> proulx.com>
Subject: RE: bug#10134: acknowledged by developer (close 10134) |
	[debbugs-tracker] Processed: close 10134
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 10:03:06 -0800

> > Another bug closure with no explanation mail sent to the filer.
> > Just a reminder that this is not really kosher.
> 
> I hereby declare, under the religious authority vested in me by the
> Church of Emacs, that closing bugs with no explanation mail does not
> violate kosher laws.

http://debbugs.gnu.org/server-control.html:

 close bugnumber [ fixed-version ] 
 Close bug report #bugnumber. 
 A notification is sent to the user who reported the bug, but
 (in contrast to mailing bugnumber-done) the text of the mail
 which caused the bug to be closed is not included in that
 notification. The maintainer who closes a report should ensure,
 probably by sending a separate message, that the user who
 reported the bug knows why it is being closed.

Not providing an explanation for the closure requires the bug filer to look up
the bug number, consult the bug thread on line, and reread the thread looking
for an explanation.

When you close a bug it might be obvious to you why it was closed, but it is not
obvious to a user who receives only an automatic control message saying it was
closed.  The only information available to the user in that message is the bug's
number and subject line.

> > (Yes, I read the bug thread and I realize the bug has now 
> > been fixed.)
> 
> ... especially when the objection is this silly.

Silly and all a big joke to you perhaps.  But to obtain that knowledge of what
the closure meant (the bug was fixed) I still had to look up the bug thread and
reread it.  If the automatic message had said that it was fixed then I would not
have needed to do that.  Perhaps that part of the automatic messaging could be
improved.

If a bug has been fixed, knowledge of that fact is often all the filer needs.
If it has not been fixed (e.g. was declared not-a-bug or wishlist or wont-fix),
then additional explanation is typically needed.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.