Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[J]

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Alberto Salvia Novella
 wrote:
> After a period of a week nobody opposed, and I have addressed all the
> individual issues that people reported about it.

Ok... below.

> Moreover my latest poll was also performed outside of Ubuntu. And it showed
> that were half the outsiders disagreed, hundred percent of insiders
> disagreed. And the polls were verbatim.

Link? the last poll I saw was one about adding unnecessary external
artwork to which 100% of respondents said "No"

> So in my view I cannot take disagreement too seriously here. I'm open to
> consider any option, except staying the same that proves not to work.

But you wanted critque, so here it is:

> Etiquette
> Keep in mind that many software in Ubuntu is maintained by people in their 
> spare time, brought to you for free.

This seems pretty incomplete.  So what if people maintain it in their
spare time?  What consideration should I provide here because of this
statement?  This isn't a rule of etiquette, this is just a statement
about where it comes from.

> If you care about an Ubuntu release not having bugs, test the daily image 
> five months before launch. So developers have time to fix it.

Since you suggest I test the daily image... how do I do that?  Where
do I learn more?  What is the process for testing?  How do I get these
images?  You suggest potentially new and inexperienced testers do a
thing, then fail to tell them how to do that thing, or where to find
more information on doing that thing.

> If writing more doesn't make a tangible difference, write less.

What does this mean?  To someone who has never written a bug, or
written very few, what is tangible between more and less?  YOU may
know, I may know, Brian may know, but the newbie who just downloaded
Ubuntu for the first time has no idea what is and isn't worth
mentioning in a bug report, and as someone who FIXES bugs, I would
much rather have too much info than a bug report that is simply "X
doesn't work" which is the "less" end of the spectrum.

> If you have any doubt, you can ask any time.

You should also point them to IRC.

> Not bugs
> You shouldn't file a bug here if you are:

> Using a BIOS or firmware which can be causing the problem

I'm a newbie, how the heck do I know if BIOS can be causing a problem?
 So because I have firmware (and know nothing about firmware, so
theoretically, it COULD be a cause) I shouldn't report a bug?  There
are plenty of times where you don't know it's firmware until well
after the bug has been filed, triaged and investigated.

> Requesting support

Bugs ARE support requests.  They are "I am having trouble running X
because Y happens which prevents me from using X"

> Requesting new software

Feature Requests ARE valid bugs, LP and Github are FULL of feature request bugs.

> Discussing ideas

That I can agree on, bugs are not meant for discussion, but you don't
really tell people how to find the appropriate avenue for discussing
those ideas.

> Using software outside the official repositories

I use all sorts of software outside of official repositories, so I
should never file a bug?  Because that is how that item reads to me.
This says, exactly, "You shouldn't file a bug if you are using
software outside the official repositories"

> Reporting misspells

Misspellings, typos and other minor issues are still valid bugs.  Why
shouldn't they report them?

The point is, the original version of this actually took the time to
explain WHY these don't count, and provided other means to address
these issues.  You just tell users to not file bugs and provide no
other information beyond that.

> Reporting windowed applications
> In the Terminal application enter:

> ubuntu-bug -w

> Reporting non windowed applications
> 1. Using the Synaptic application and the list of common packages, determine 
> which software package is the most likely to be affected.

Use Synaptic for what?  I don't use synaptic and I've been using
Ubuntu for almost 10 years now, I've NEVER used or even installed
synaptic.  I'm a newbie, how do I use Synaptic to file a bug?  Again,
you suggest doing a thing without telling newbies how to do that
thing.  What about determining the command used and dpkg -S to find
the package?  You give no screenshots to explain what you're telling
people to do, so someone who has never seen those tools will have no
idea what to expect and could end up blindly clicking "things" hoping
they are correct.  Remember the discussion about imagery?  THIS is
where images are appropriate, to highlight and further explain a plain
text statement.

> 2. In the Terminal application enter the following, substituting PACKAGE with 
> your package name:

> ubuntu-bug PACKAGE

What happens when ubuntu-bug tells me a package is not an official
ubuntu package?

> 3. Or if you haven't been able to determine the package, just enter:

> ubuntu-bug

> Reporting offline systems
> If the system internet does't work, do 

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Alberto Salvia Novella]

Brian Murray:
> "Substituting FILE with your file name" still seems incomplete to me.

The hole section is about how to generate a file, where the previous 
step already mentions which file we are talking about:


"Copy the generated file to the system used for filing the report"

I don't think we need to clarify further what FILE is. The deixis is 
already strong there.



Gunnar Hjalmarsson:
> Personally I'd like to see much of what you removed be reinserted.

When the guide was like before people was asking frequently how to 
report bugs. It wasn't till I put a video-tutorial in the top of the 
page when they stopped doing so.


I also asked a couple of people to show me in person how they would be 
reporting bugs using that guide. Both took long time to figure it out, 
and mentioned they would normally give up.


If you bring back the guide as it was nobody except us will be using it. 
We are better only putting there what is common, and letting people ask 
the infrequent cases. If something really hurts afterwards we can bring 
the pieces back from the historic at any time.



Brian Murray:
> Did you feel like you had reached a consensus with editors of the
> page?

After a period of a week nobody opposed, and I have addressed all the 
individual issues that people reported about it.


Moreover my latest poll was also performed outside of Ubuntu. And it 
showed that were half the outsiders disagreed, hundred percent of 
insiders disagreed. And the polls were verbatim.


So in my view I cannot take disagreement too seriously here. I'm open to 
consider any option, except staying the same that proves not to work.


There's only one place where there aren't any issues:
(https://goo.gl/DmGDfR)



-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Brian Murray]

On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 08:17:50PM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> Brian Murray wrote:
> > Are you committing to doing the work of bringing the missing bits
> > back?
> 
> Yes, I am. Moreover this is the kind of documentation I usually read, so if
> something is missing I would probably notice.
> 
> 
> Brian Murray:
> > If you are willing please edit the page and explain what PACKAGE and
> > FILE mean.

"Substituting FILE with your file name" still seems incomplete to me. If
this is a step in a multi-step process it'd be best to explain that if
you used the file names from the previous example then you'd want to use
those.

I may have missed some of the discussion about changes to the
ReportingBugs page but I'm really surprised that you went ahead and
replaced the existing page with what you thought was better. Did you
feel like you had reached a consensus with editors of the page or did
you just do what you thought was best?

--
Brian Murray
Ubuntu Bug Master


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Alberto Salvia Novella]

Brian Murray wrote:
> Are you committing to doing the work of bringing the missing bits
> back?

Yes, I am. Moreover this is the kind of documentation I usually read, so 
if something is missing I would probably notice.



Brian Murray:
> If you are willing please edit the page and explain what PACKAGE and
> FILE mean.

Done:
(https://help.ubuntu.com/community/ReportingBugs)



-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Brian Murray]

On Mon, May 08, 2017 at 06:42:14PM +0200, Alberto Salvia Novella wrote:
> Brian Murray:
> >There is no indication that "PACKAGE" is a place holder or variable on
> >the ReportingBugs page.
> 
> Brian Murray:
> > Additionally, the purpose of hiding the Launchpad +filebug page was to
> > reduce the quantity of bug reports like this.
> 
> I already fixed those yesterday by making the links non clickable. If you
> see that doesn't work just let me know.
> 
> 
> Brian Murray:
> > I think you've gone a bit too far in removing useful material from the
> > previous iteration of the page.
> 
> At first it may be difficult to distinguish between what is necessary and
> what isn't. Getting rid of items is naturally disturbing.
> 
> People tend to surround themselves with things, thinking that they may be
> necessary in the future. They see something that is never used and think
> that, anyway, it will serve later for something.
> 
> That behaviour tends to this:
> (https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2496/4192565462_d12591cf44_b.jpg)
> (https://elsmar.com/Identify_Waste/img011.jpg)
> 
> So the idea is to put away all the doubtful items, and if some shows to
> really hurt when missing then bring it back.

Are you committing to doing the work of bringing the missing bits back
or will you leave that for the rest of us?

If you are willing please edit the page and explain what PACKAGE and
FILE mean.

--
Brian Murray
Ubuntu Bug Master


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Brian Murray]

On Thu, May 04, 2017 at 08:16:44PM -0500, EdLesMann wrote:
> On 05/04/2017 11:24 AM, Magnus Määttä wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > I guess this is the address to send mail to for bug reports since there
> > aren't any valid working other ways to do it.
> > The website doesn't have any working link to any bug-report form and the
> > "ubuntu-bug" utility thinks I want to report a bug with the resolution
> > or graphics when selecting "other problem" and
> > is trying to include information from this other system which is
> > actually working (version: 16.10).
> > 
> > Anyway. Since installing Ubuntu/Kubuntu 17.04, WiFi network connectivity
> > doesn't work anymore. It works just fine with all other equipment known
> > to man except any equipment updated to version 17.04, which seems to be
> > a real showstopper for 17.04, so ideally it (17.04) should be recalled.
> 
> When you file a proper bug report, please post back. I just did an
> upgrade from 16.10 to 17.04 on my surface pro 2 tablet and wifi straight
> up dies. Tells me that the password isn't correct in the log files (it
> is). So I did a fresh install of 17.04, same thing. Just did a fresh
> install of 16.10 and wifi works again. I've just been busy this
> afternoon and haven't filed a report, so if yours is anything like mine
> I will add a "me too!" with the information I have.

You may want to have a look at LP: #1687623.

--
Brian Murray


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality

Re: Showstopper bug report (17.04): WiFi not working

[Alberto Salvia Novella]

Magnus Määttä:
> I guess this is the address to send mail to for bug reports since
> there aren't any valid working other ways to do it.

https://youtu.be/5R-yOJCKVJw



-- 
Ubuntu-quality mailing list
Ubuntu-quality@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: 
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality