Re: What is the point of bug-lilypond?

[Jean Abou Samra]

Le 16/10/2021 à 13:09, David Kastrup a écrit :
> Jean Abou Samra <jean@abou-samra.fr> writes:
> > Hi James, Werner, all,
> > > I would say that 'most' emails to the bug list do NOT need an issue, 
> > > they are either replies to emails or pointers to existing Issues 
> > > that explain bug or technical discussions about why something is not 
> > > a bug but a limitation of what is possible based on how we code 
> > > things (which itself engenders more emails). 
> > Yes, absolutely -- and you're doing this very well. However, when you 
> > decide that the report calls for an issue, do you edit it (change 
> > example, use different terms) or is it good enough to be pasted 
> > as-is? I may be wrong, and I certainly do not want to diminish your 
> > work on bug reports, but I had the impression that most often the 
> > issue was made just from the email thread. That's also what I usually 
> > do. To be clear, I am not proposing that we change anything to the 
> > way we respond to bug reports (discussing whether it's a bug, 
> > pointing to documentation, etc.) which is handled very well as it is. 
> > It just appears to me that the bug-lilypond mailing list is redundant 
> > as the same tasks can be done better via the issue tracker. 
> I disagree. "can be done better via the issue tracker" glosses over 
> who does the stuff. Having a mailing list to report bugs gives us a 
> low barrier to receive user feedback regarding problems, perceived and 
> genuine. Leaving only the tracker requires anybody encountering a 
> problem to a) register an account on GitLab


Well, compare this to subscribing to the list
and receiving others' bug reports afterwards.


> b) read up on the categories and flags we use for bug reports 

Again, I was _not_ proposing to ask users to do that
at all. To report a problem, open an issue and that's
all. Just like "send an email and that's all".

Adding labels is the role of the same people who
triage bug-lilypond now.


> c) triage their bug and determine the proper categories and severity


Similarly, no.


> d) enter their bug into GitLab and deal with responses That's 
> basically giving the message "non-programmers and casual users: don't 
> even bother". For a programming library, that may be sort of a 
> reasonable tradeoff. For an application intended for musicians, I 
> don't see that.

For the reasons above, I don't think so.

There may be a generational effect in views on the
ease of working with mailing lists. I can at least
see a lot of software not primarily intended for
programmers directing bug reports to a web system
directly. Examples: Firefox, WikiMedia, GIMP (GNU
software), LibreOffice, MuseScore, Frescobaldi.


> Additionally having a bug-xxx@gnu.org mailing list for receiving bug 
> reports is standard for GNU applications, so even for some important 
> subset of programmers it is the expectation that this should be a way 
> to enter problem reports.

What the guidelines say about it is

  Once a program is in use, you will get bug
  reports for it. Most GNU programs have their
  own special lists for sending bug reports.
  The advertised bug-reporting email address
  should always be ‘bug-package@gnu.org’, to
  help show users that the program is a GNU package,
  but it is ok to set up that list to forward
  to another site if you prefer.

  We also have a catch-all list,
bug-gnu-utils@gnu.org, which is used for all
  GNU programs that don’t have their own specific
  lists. But nowadays we want to give each program
  its own bug-reporting list and move away from
  using bug-gnu-utils.


“Most GNU programs” does not suggest that this
is a requirement. If it is a concern nevertheless,
the bug-lilypond address can be made to redirect to
a GitLab address that opens issues (every GitLab
user can have one per project; this one could
be LilyPond Bot's).

Regards,
Jean