I understand when writing paid software with support expectations/contracts, sometimes you have to engage with the teeth-pulling exercise that is “does not work”. But why do you in FOSS? Can’t you just close the ticket and say “not descriptive enough” and move on?
To do that, you need a healthy brutal self-respecting trait that I think most of us admire.
The rest of us feel bad doing that, especially towards someone trying to use something we built ourselves that holds some measure of our own pride or even self-worth, it feels closer to obligation. So we waste our time trying to help the characters that deserve our help the least, and we learn to develop a resentful version of that trait over a period of decades.
Sounds like a good way for someone without coding skills to help a project, bug/message triage.
But then, a good bug-reporting system should be able to do such filtering?
I'm wondering if detecting abusive communications is/could be part of it, bit of ML seems like it would fit, even just some Bayesian filtering might do.
One could also train an NN to recognise images of the app (or simpler: OCR|grep) and require a screenshot with any submission.
But I guess automated triage mightn't be the best route. It seems very much a delicately balanced people problem.
I don't think you even need to be that brutal. Just have a file on your hard drive with a canned response that instructs the reporter that they need to provide more information, and how to provide it. Every time you run into a weak bug report, copy-paste that response into the issue comments. If the extra info gets provided, great, now it's a useful bug report. If not, you can close the issue, and not feel anywhere near as bad about doing so.
You can and I regularly close tickets for not following the template that says at the very top "tickets not following this template will be closed with no reply".
It's even better if you can get a bot to automatically reply and close it.
I was thinking about how one could automate this when reading.
Not a foolproof way, but add a string in your Issue Templates that is required to be there, e.g. <!-- AUTOMATIC-CHECK -->.
If this is not present in the issue, the GitHub action just closes the issue with a message to please fill in the template if they wish to create an issue.
Doesn't catch nearly everything, but should get some and it's easy to set up. Could be interesting to go further with the idea and maybe check if each section contains text or something like this, hmm...
Another, somewhat more underhanded trick: add a string that is required to not be there, e.g. "Please remove this line entirely.", halfway through the template, and mention it nowhere else.
I've seen this in repos, I'm pretty sure there are bots who implement it. I'd guess it catches more than 90% of cases, especially if you put the string at the bottom of the template.
You can. You can do anything, really, including not reading issue reports at all. But you set out to be helpful anyway, so it’s about finding a cutoff where you don’t want to help anymore. As I said, it’s simply harder than ignoring assholes. (Plus you may get a bad rep.)
Honestly sometimes the amount of things that you need to fill out just makes me use other software. I.e. kmail would never remember that I want my email threads expanded (this example is not real, the kmail devs were very helpful with minimal info in this case). Does this really require I hunt down all this info from all around the place? Sometimes I don't even know where to get the info.
What helps immensely (and I saw this in the Geyser MC project), the software can produce a snippet with all info the devs want with one command, and it even exports to pastebin taking out sensitive info. If you paste such a link in their Discord it even makes an overview with syntax highlighting in the chat. That really helps a lot on my (bug reporter) side. And thus on the dev side.
KDE, and it's related apps, is an interesting one. For a long time you could get the version info from a menu item (Help>About or something) in any of the K apps. But then they changed it to give no version info ... then the bug report tool asks up front what version you're using ...
One of the great things with Steam when I started running it on Linux was it's debugging info that gathered details of your system so you didn't have to.
> But then they changed it to give no version info
This is still the case. Every KDE application has the menu entries Help → About $APPNAME and Help → About KDE which both show the relevant version numbers. I'm overwhelmingly certain this feature never went away because I am on a rolling distro and upgraded through pretty much all versions and I figure I would have noticed the absence of these menu entries.
> then the bug report tool asks up front what version you're using
That's incorrect. The menu entry Help → Report Bug… opens a dialog with version information that has a button Launch Bug Report Wizard which produces a link like e.g. `https://bugs.kde.org/enter_bug.cgi?format=guided&product=kon...`. Consequently in the bugtracker, the available information is already filled in.
----
By the way, this post is an example for the bullshit asymmetry principle, and I resent that I had to spend a magnitude more time to correct your misinformation than it took you to produce it. Please be a better netizen.
Ok, I'm a 20y user of KDE, and a massive supporter. I still got the app version from apt (apt-get at the time) and framework version and still submitted bug reports - after registering and installing symbols to get decent backtraces. I even helped some people improve their forum posts by showing them how to get the relevant version numbers.
There was a change, it was unhelpful. There were reasons, it was to do with changes in versioning on plasma frameworks - I could look up the details, but that isn't really important a few years hence.
The jist of my comment is that structures within an application can help us non-programmers to make useful bug submissions; I cited 2 examples from my real life experience.
Hopefully we agree on the basic premise I set out at least?
I understand the -1, but you have to understand that to a user the choice is sometimes between:
1. Create crappy bug report and move on quickly to get things done or:
2. Do not create a bug report and move on immediately, to get things done
I try to file whenever I can but when it's getting late and I want to go to bed I choose option 1 sometimes. Maybe I should choose option 2?
For example, take the Nextcloud bug filing template on GitHub [0]. It's quite a long read but sure, worth the effort for free software I agree (Nextcloud is my favorite project, my life is in there, on my server)! However, I may not know exactly where these things are:
```
#### Web server error log
<details>
<summary>Web server error log</summary>
```
Insert your webserver log here
```
</details>
#### Nextcloud log (data/nextcloud.log)
<details>
<summary>Nextcloud log</summary>
```
Insert your Nextcloud log here
```
</details>
#### Browser log
<details>
<summary>Browser log</summary>
```
Insert your browser log here, this could for example include:
a) The javascript console log
b) The network log
c) ...
```
They also want config.php, contents of `sudo -u www-data php occ app:list`, ask you to do this:
Login as admin user into your Nextcloud and access
http://example.com/index.php/settings/integrity/failed
Also all versions:
### Server configuration
\*Operating system:\*
\*Web server:\*
\*Database:\*
\*PHP version:\*
\*Nextcloud version:\* (see Nextcloud admin page)
\*Updated from an older Nextcloud/ownCloud or fresh install:\*
Moreover, I'm quite afraid to put my domain names or even more sensitive info onto a public website if I just copy and paste. All I'm saying is that a big button that generates everything a dev needs with sensitive stuff redacted (which should be doable here and yes maybe I should make a PR for that) will make the experience a lot nicer for the reporter and the dev.
As said, the Geyser MC project [1] can do exactly this and to me it is a game changer, the whole process was fast and pleasant and it was easy to test the automated builds they made in the branch based on my issue and report back in context on GitHub. Pasting the JSON their report feature generates into their Discord channel together with your question and their ability to just !docs/something point you to relevant docs with a small command feels like magic. I found the whole process inspirational.
> But "it's getting late" is not an excuse; it's getting later for people who need to read your crappy bug report.
First of all, I applaud your proper use of the semicolon in a sentence. As someone who should probably step away from my computer a lot more though, I've got to disagree that "it's getting late" isn't a valid excuse, because I use it all the time and I mean it when I say it (i.e. it's 4am and I have to wake up for work in 6 hours).
No one’s forcing you to submit a ticket at 4am, full stop. You can do it the next day, or you can simply not do it. You’re the initiator of the interaction, and if you intentionally half-ass it you’re not respecting the other side. Not sure what that snarky (?) remark on semicolon usage was about. We’re not grade school pupils here so no point in applauding or criticizing punctuation usage; doing so only raises eyebrows.
> Not sure what that snarky (?) remark on semicolon usage was about.
I definitely wasn't intending to be snarky, my compliment was genuine. I don't see people use semicolons properly in sentences often, or much at all outside of coding. I meant no offense, I was giving you an honest compliment.
Hey, I also just wanted to say that I know you FOSS folks are overworked and under-appreciated, and a lot of us really do appreciate you. I know you all get bombarded with all kinds of BS all the time, and I'm thankful that my patience hasn't been tested to such an extent. Thank you.
Fair enough. It helps if at least the communciation is clear: Like "Fill it all or don't file" or "Try to file as much as you can".
I really don't want to make it later for devs that give me so much. I'd be ok with: "Closed: Too little info" from a bot. I may decide to have another crack at it later when I have more time.
Edit: Btw, I'm using software for fee but, I'm also beta-testing for free. It's not just a one-way street: "I derive value from a free product so I should never complain." Is that really true?
I also invest time beta-testing (some times for products that make money on support or are open-core or are a gateway to paid software). Sure there are trolls, but there are also many users that make crappy reports that really want to help but just don't understand how (or why their report is a waste of everyone's time).
> I'm using software for fee but, I'm also beta-testing for free.
Assuming you're talking about a beta release for some open source software package, versus a full release, I don't think the distinction matters. You're using software that you got for free. It doesn't matter if it's beta- or release-quality. You aren't entitled to different/better support for it just because the developer chose to put out a version they admit isn't quite release-quality[0]. You're entitled to exactly the same amount of support as for a release version: none whatsoever.
> "I derive value from a free product so I should never complain."
I think that's framed the wrong way. I do agree that you should probably never complain about something you got for free; that smacks of undeserved entitlement. But constructive criticism and useful bug reports are (usually, depending on the maintainer) welcome.
[0] A developer might put out a beta version for a variety of reasons. One reason, yes, might be because they intend to jump on support requests faster in order to shape things up for a proper release. But another reason might be because they simply wanted to share with people as soon as possible.
TFA and the person you're replying are not suggesting you can never complain (at least I don't think they are).
There is a difference between not complaining vs raising issues constructively and valuing the maintainers time at least as much as you value your own time.
there's a game I used to play fairly often before updates simply broke it. like mission items were replaced with random fires floating in water. many users with the same issue reported it, and some like me even provided a save (which was never even downloaded)
all such tickets were closed with "cannot reproduce"
I'm not (their) tester, I don't have time to fully reproduce issues step by step, and I don't have access to a debug build anyway to figure out the bug trigger condition
Was the game free? And did the people working on the game contribute a lot of their time to it for free?
If not then I can see the reason for your frustration, however it is not the same as free software being worked on (at least partly) by volunteers receiving the same lack of effort (or in signal's case nastiness) in bug submissions.
