Libsoup broke (part deux)

[Donald Byrd]

Jeremy,

You forgot to copy gnome at freebsd.org ;)

> Don't want to upgrade system and trying to use new stuff from ports are  
> the most common that cause apps can't be build in our list. So, yes, we  
> are expecting for user to upgrade apps first.

*ALL* apps? Not going to happen. A small machine like a P2 or P3 500mhz
takes HOURS or even DAYS to build GNOME2 and dependencies. You also have to
consider all the 'config' prompts that come up waiting for a reply. That
adds a lot of time to the building process if you are not on top of things. 

Doing a 'portupgrade -a' would upgrade everything installed in the system.
Hundreds of ports could be upgraded. This might actually expose you to new
bugs in unrelated ports. Not only is it unreasonable to expect a user to do
this, it is downright *dangerous* and *irresponsible* to ask a normal user
to do that. After all, if the ports were so perfect and safe, the user
wouldn't be reporting a port problem in the first place. 

I understand the need to know if the user is installing the latest and
greatest, so if you are going to go that route I suggest doing 'portupgrade
-rR <port>' instead.

> Hours have never happened to me before, they usually come up fast unless  
> the error is very unique.

Ever notice that when you are super familiar with a subject, searching is so
much easier? Many normal users wouldn't know what to search on, and wouldn't
know what to do with the answer when they got it.

> That line I think it should be remove.

We agree on something :) The question is kind of an advanced or power-user
type thing.

> Actually, your attach has never make it to the list as see a proof in  
> below link. Next time, let us know that you are sending attach in the  
> email and we will asking for re-send attach.

Ah, and there lies the rub. In order to comply with the process I have to
send an e-mail that doesn't comply with the process to notify someone that I
intend to be sending another e-mail that does comply with the process. Oh, I
suppose I could just paste the build log into the text of the message but I
thought that compressing it would be more responsible. This is getting
complicated.

FYI: I received this reply to the original message. 

>> Your mail to 'freebsd-gnome' with the subject
>>     Libsoup broke?
>> Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
>> The reason it is being held:
>>     SpamAssassin identified this message as possible spam

I don't know who the list moderator is, or if you can see this type of stuff
or not.

> Sorry if you think that I was rude. I just gave a straight answer. We get

> a lot of emails with no useful info, so our answer is getting plain and  
> plainer until they resend something useful.

I hate to say it but that is a closed source attitude. With closed source,
they have your money and aren't going to make any more by fixing your
problem so they make it hard on purpose (ON PURPOSE). But with open source,
the valuable commodity is the knowledge that something may be broken. The
end user has it and the developer's don't. So the error reporting process
should be easy, polite, helpful, as automated as possible, and designed to
accept the fact that most of the time the user doesn't know the difference
between PCI and his keyboard. Bug reports that can't be reproduced or even
understood should still get filed away so maybe someone very knowledgeable
will someday notice a pattern.

The whole reason I was having this libsoup problem is that I was trying to
update GNOME to fix a crash on startup problem. I didn't bother trying to
report that one because I don't know enough about it to know whose problem
it was. I made the mistake of clicking on the "inform developers" once, only
to get a face full of "if you don't know what you are talking about, don't
submit bugs..." attitude that I (obviously) hate. 

This problem I thought was different in that it was likely just a port
dependency issue. I've encountered those before and have always had very
positive experiences when reporting them.

Have a great new year,
Don. 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Messenger [mailto:mezz7 at cox.net] 
Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 11:04 PM
To: Donald Byrd
Subject: Re: Libsoup broke (part deux)

On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 21:44:18 -0600, Donald Byrd <don at tig.org> wrote:

> *sigh* Typical.
>
> Before I sent the e-mail I was unaware of this web page so don't take an
> attitude with me.
>
> You expect me to do this before I contact you. This is very, very, very  
> time
> consuming. What if I *don't* want to upgrade every port on my system?

Don't want to upgrade system and trying to use new stuff from ports are  
the most common that cause apps can't be build in our list. So, yes, we  
are expecting for user to upgrade apps first.

> How many hours do you expect me to spend searching mail list archives?

Hours have never happened to me before, they usually come up fast unless  
the error is very unique.

> Who am I to decide if a "bug" is OS/User/Platform specific or not?  
> Unreasonable
> expectations.

That line I think it should be remove.

> http://www.freebsd.org/gnome/docs/bugging.html
> 1. When should I make a bug report?
> .	After running any build failure output through gnomelogalyzer.sh.
> .	After running cvsup to obtain the most recent ports tree.
> .	After running portupgrade -a to ensure that all applications are
> up-to-date.
> .	After searching through the FreeBSD GNOME Mailing list archives to
> see if the problem has already been reported.
> .	After deciding whether the problem is FreeBSD-specific, or is a bug
> in an application that would affect all users, on all operating systems.
> <snip>
>
> As for the information requested in a bug report, of course my e-mail was
> not specific enough to constitute a bug report. I wasn't aware that it  
> would
> be so considered. I have sent casual messages to port caretakers before  
> and
> have been either directed to a specific bug reporting web app, or I was  
> just
> asked questions. Typically, the correct course is unknown until you ask.
> That's all the e-mail was doing. I suggest that you put text in your  
> (fresh)
> ports description that you only accept e-mails that conform to the spec
> outlined in your debugging web page.
>
> As for my reply, like I have already said, the bug reporting expectations
> are an unrealistic burden upon the normal user.
>
>> Of course, they will asking what error are you seeing (that one you have
>> never show us), what is version of Windows, what were last thing that  
>> you
>> did to the Windows and how did you reproduce it.
>
> For the record, my original e-mail I sent (not the one you replied to)  
> had
> an attachment with the entire output of the build process including the
> error. The second e-mail was just providing additional information. Get  
> your
> facts straight before you go throwing stones.

Actually, your attach has never make it to the list as see a proof in  
below link. Next time, let us know that you are sending attach in the  
email and we will asking for re-send attach.

http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-gnome/2006-January/013286.html

> Don't worry Jeremy, I won't bother trying to report anything to GNOME
> anymore. You ignore the information I do send, you will ignore the  
> problem
> until I trash my system after spending 3 days rebuilding every single  
> port
> on the box, and you are rude.

Sorry if you think that I was rude. I just gave a straight answer. We get  
a lot of emails with no useful info, so our answer is getting plain and  
plainer until they resend something useful.

Cheers,
Mezz

> Have a great new year.
>
> /out.
>