LOR status page?

[Don Bowman]

From: Garance A Drosihn [mailto:drosih at rpi.edu]
> 
> At 3:46 PM -0800 3/24/04, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 24, 2004 at 02:03:28PM -0600, Jon Noack wrote:
> >  > Would it be helpful to put up a web page with all known lock
> >  > order reversal false positives (or better yet all known lock
> >  > order reversals with a status indication)?  This would allow
> >  > people to check there before reporting, saving everyone time.
> >
> >Clearly we need to do something to stop people reporting the same
> >non-bugs every day, the problem is that it needs to be somewhere
> >people are likely to check.  Maybe a pointer to your proposed
> >webpage in UPDATING will help.
> 
> Could we do something so we don't PRINT the false-positives?  If
> we're about to turn 5.x-current into 5.x-stable, then it is not
> good to tell users "Here are a bunch of error messages that you
> should just ignore".  At least in my experience, what happens is
> that users are much more likely to ignore *all* error messages.
> 
> I have no idea what would need to be done, of course.  I'm just
> uneasy at telling users to ignore scary-looking error messages.
> 
> I do agree that a web page saying exactly which ones to ignore
> would be better than expecting end-users to figure that out by
> scanning the mailing lists...

How about make the first line of the error message be:
"This technique sometimes produces false positives... See
http://.../ for more details"