Old Bug Triage Reports

[Lena Voytek]

Here are the results of a few bug triages that fell by the wayside.

Bugs last updated on 2022-07-07 (Thursday)
Date range identified as: "Friday triage"
Found 9 bugs

LP: #1679412  - unbound - Missing dep8 tests
Tests were added to Kinetic, marked fix released

LP: #1980911  - mysql-8.0 - package
mysql-server-8.0 8.0.29-0ubuntu0.22.04.2 failed...
Mysql looked in the wrong location for a .so file, possibly a config error.
Asked for more information.

Bugs last updated between 2022-07-15 (Friday) and 2022-07-17 (Sunday)
inclusive
Date range identified as: "Monday triage"
Found 6 bugs

LP: #1981794  - dnsmasq - Duplicate/retried DNS
queries fail with REFUSED
Confirmed this is a bug, added patch file from upstream commit.

Bugs last updated on 2022-09-01 (Thursday)
Date range identified as: "Friday triage"
Found 5 bugs

All is good here.

Bugs last updated between 2022-09-02 (Friday) and 2022-09-04 (Sunday)
inclusive
Date range identified as: "Monday triage"
Found 7 bugs

LP: #1988589  - mysql-8.0 - Impossible to change
the server port
Was unable to reproduce, asked for additional files.
-- 
ubuntu-server mailing list
ubuntu-server@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-server
More info: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/ServerTeam

Re: Finalizing server guide diataxis

[Christian Ehrhardt]

On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 12:41 AM Bryce Harrington
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 10:27:27AM -0700, Lena Voytek wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > As I finish up the preparations for the Server Guide to transition to
> > diataxis, I was wondering if I could get your feedback on a few items.
> >
> > The first is the new home page. I created a page for its proposal here
> > 
> > (excluding the full navigation section), and can move its contents over to
> > the current home page  next, which will
> > automatically update the guide's navigation. It's meant to match the 
> > standard
> > homepage documentation
> > 
> > as closely as possible, similar to Ubuntu Core
> > . If there is anything that can be worded
> > better, or that is missing and should be there let me know!
> >
> > Second are the diataxis home pages: Tutorials
> > , How-to
> > guides ,
> > Explanations
> >  and
> > Reference .
> > These are meant to be similar to Ubuntu Core's sections: Tutorials
> > , How-to
> > , Explanation
> > , and Reference
> > .
> >
> > Lastly I would like your opinion on formatting for some of the existing
> > server guide pages. Many of our pages focus on individual packages, and
> > while doing so contain portions that vary in terms of what part of diataxis
> > they fall under. For example, in the Squid page
> > , the first two
> > paragraphs are an explanation, followed by the Installation and
> > Configuration sections which are technically tutorials, and ending with the
> > References section which of course falls under reference. There are two
> > main options I could move forward with here. The first would be to split
> > the page up to purely match diataxis, possibly adding some more depth to
> > the explanation, while creating a new page specifically as a tutorial for
> > installing/configuring the package. The second would be to leave the page
> > as it currently is and mark it as a reference. This would likely be easier
> > for users to follow since they would be able to reference all important
> > information about a given package without going to multiple pages. This
> > change would affect most single-page packages in the Services and Tools
> > section of the guide. Larger guides, however, such as OpenLDAP
> > , can be split
> > much more cleanly by page between the four categories.
>
> Hi Lena, first thanks for all the work and attention on this.  The
> restructuring work here looks overwhelming but you've given good though
> into how it can be organized.
>
> I don't have a deep knowledge of Diataxis, basically just a read-thru of
> https://diataxis.fr/ coupled with past experience with doc writing.
> Hopefully these thoughts aren't too far misaligned to be of use.
>
> Wearing the hat of a server user that would be consuming these different
> kinds of documents, and thinking about what currently exists in the
> Ubuntu Server Guide, honestly none of it matches what I'd expect as
> "Reference".  To me, "reference docs" for server stuff would be way more
> akin to man pages and --help text; I would not be unpleasantly surprised
> to find in Reference copies of upstream's reference docs, reformatted
> for Ubuntu's website (along the lines of readthedocs.org).  Much of what
> we currently have is too piecemeal and narratively structured to be what
> I would consider proper reference.  In particular, the lists of
> "reference" links to external resources to be "Reference Documentation";
> they are more just "See Also" links.
>
> Honestly I don't think the Server Team is really contituted in a way
> that lends itself to writing and maintaining reference documentation,
> with the exception *maybe* of software Canonical develops and maintains
> itself like Curtin.
>
> So for the Reference section, I kind of am of the mind that this section
> should start empty and maybe should be populated by auto-generating what
> the upstream provides in the versions of packages included in the given
> LTS release.  As a user, having all the upstream docs reliably gathered
> together in one place, with consistent formatting (and maybe even
> cross-referencing!) would be a big value-add.
>
>
> To me, the authorial intent of the Ubuntu Server Guide aims to something
> in between