[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Processed: control message for bug #33200

From: Michael Albinus
Subject: Re: Processed: control message for bug #33200
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2018 11:57:01 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux)

"Garreau, Alexandre" <address@hidden> writes:

Hi Alexandre,

>>> I don't think anybody really uses "owner" much, so it de facto hardly
>>> means anything.
>> If you are using debbugs.el, it might be helpful to read its user
>> guide. Try (info "(debbugs-ug)")
> It really ought to have an index.

It's more complicate. The ELPA debbugs package offers two manuals,
(info "(debbugs-ug)") and (info "(debbugs)") . The former is the user
guide I have recommended to you, it describes how to interact with
debbugs-gnu.el (and debbug-org.el, FWIW). The latter guide describes the
SOAP interface of debbugs.el, which communicates with It is not relevant for public use; however, it
describes the attributes in detail. That's why they are not described in
the debbugs user guide, again. It's an unfortunate situation, and shall
be improved.

> Hence:
>> The attribute "owner" is intended to document, who is responsible for
>> fixing a bug. Usually, you tag a bug with it in order to tell other
>> people that you are working on the bug. However, in the Emacs community
>> this is used rarely.
> This is a neat, unambiguous and formal definition.  Why isn’t it in the
> aforementioned manual?

I've quoted this from (info "(debbugs) Requesting bugs statuses")

> If it was defined in the manual it could be in the index.  Then, a
> potential confirmation prompt feature might offer as a third choice to
> visit the appropriated manual place to help users confirm the meaning of
> what they’re doing.

I will see whether I could enhance the debbugs user guide accordingly.

>> Patches welcome!
> Okay let’s try:
> +(defcustom debbugs-gnu-confirm-control-messages '("owner")
> +  "List of control messages asking for confirmation.
> +Each message listed will make `debbugs-gnu-send-control-message'
> +ask for confirmation before sending control message mail."
> +  :type (cons 'set (mapcar (apply-partially #'list 'const)
> +                           debbugs-gnu-control-messages))
> +  :group 'debbugs-gnu)

I don't believe whether we need to determine, which attribute needs
confirmation, and which not. Likely, it is sufficient to have a user

(defcustom debbugs-gnu-confirm-control-messages nil
  "Whether control messages shall be confirmed prior sending."
  :type 'boolean
  :group 'debbugs-gnu)

And then we have

      (when (or debbugs-gnu-confirm-control-messages
                (y-or-n-p (format "Really send `%s' control message? "

Bonus, if `message' could come with a help-echo like

(propertize message 'help-echo (debbugs-gnu-help-echo message))

The missing point is to write a proper `debbugs-gnu-help-echo'
function. Would you like to work on this?

> Would that be okay? just to know, so I learn if then I report a real bug
> (or, since it’s more an improvement wishlist, maybe doesn’t it need to
> be reported as a bug?).

Wishlists are also reported as a bug. They have the severity `wishlist' :-)

> As for manual, I’m unsure of the purpose and meanings of “submitter”,
> “maint”, etc. to complete it, I still don’t know yet enough of texinfo
> to be sure.  how to make an index, how to go to that index from outside
> of info, etc.

It is not a texinfo problem first hand. It will be rather a problem
linking both guides closer. I will see what I could do.

>> Usually, you tag a bug with it in order to tell other people that you
>> are working on the bug. However, in the Emacs community this is used
>> rarely.
> So, I tried to propose a patch (to gnus), this was my first attempt.  So
> I’d like to “work on it” if I can, but I don’t want to indicate I’m
> knowledgeful enough to fully and surely be able to do it all alone:
> should I stay “owner”?  if I “noowner”, am I not (falsely) indicating I
> am not willing to “work on it” anymore?

No, you don't indicate this. Setting "owner" simply says to other people
that they don't need to care. If you remove this attribute, you still
could continue to work on the problem, but you don't say "no help needed".

>> Bug reports about the debbugs ELPA package shall go to Emacs, "M-x
>> report-emacs-bug" as usual.
> No really?  aren’t elpa package maintained on their own?

There's no formal rule about. However, it is accepted that bug reports
for GNU ELPA packages are reported towards Emacs. For other packages,
for example from MELPA, this is not the case.

> I was discussing publicly (but on the wrong list) then privately with
> some other german Michael about his elpa package (el-search) and in
> the end he stated private discussion was going to be the more
> appropriate so not to spam emacs-devel and as the package wasn’t used
> enough.

It is his own decision, of course. And he is also right about the
emacs-devel ML. But I don't see a problem if this would be discussed as
debbugs bug.

Best regards, Michael.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]