From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 564341F45A for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:54:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732294AbfHOWyU (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:54:20 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f195.google.com ([209.85.214.195]:39470 "EHLO mail-pl1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730124AbfHOWyU (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:54:20 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f195.google.com with SMTP id z3so1628298pln.6 for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:54:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IGJITiRZZ8WmPV5f+VDY7stsxBRC2PE1Jtd4FTVuy2g=; b=U2Tq87Upe34i8Wlzfc8imGMUEkQ2udyz2kOCi3Dt6anOwSmWxWeSFnnJ0Vwgkvyljb 1IvLd7DouNAxJ5BSPPEdRzCQJNeJzTutpTlBsy2hpApVRg2+COLfLM20hWq5qNt11VwE Or+vGi/5J/vaOhVlSiUMlwAconj9ptCR37MLW2sE+Vg52BhVpZZOqwBJwG4ZY47jD7CL P2hV3OW2RqYGlqHB6wolPfuKCEQrgwASocMoq/fXYLYlbLzfac9oih7Nkbf+4+yLgm7r mv6QUgFI1XuECXSxFZ2/GKS3y/YfaFeyp5iWDea7OPHMAAK1GkluvYB+WwHipmMie5hH /xaw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=IGJITiRZZ8WmPV5f+VDY7stsxBRC2PE1Jtd4FTVuy2g=; b=dei/zrXEkixhvtBDsFiyeShgbjHggb+I3VoNTNWVIR5j8hwoYAX8c41SDRqR05goWs 9z3R141/gmWT161efHoecZ6X2Qx/D6YkjwFe4N82dcVx7Qr+4+HXq1TQaatDYFX6RaHv BM85cEYobBbJ7+enTCR8n4lDYt8ft6EZl2oNTTufO2jYd0Dn9vmmLLMfFYu+4yPfeTVL HOVl5AwAc3OfUC6xZV3e6gXZCSOfvgo1kvE7DBAr4GG69BO2O3MZ2D6GyuhYDgaeoxXq JgNesIE1t9NF3e/RheM7dnVVwqwBKx3ovF61U5l4TDPdb+Mf+qSIdw64NYhcqr4Ocr+J a3Wg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXZFW1ZQnXW3xUSvONaLcxJBtYHM39CNiZJDpGehqB1tPXHqPub M1kkQBnsLQ9YsrDzsN/Cuu+g9g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzB9mY0EgCGURZTKMbV4qCR7eMU1kQajmv9Qygd1JSa/4t+mmute2SHhHewD2T2taDFDzpsqQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:5c3:: with SMTP id f61mr5921447plf.98.1565909659055; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:2ce:0:231c:11cc:aa0a:6dc5]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m125sm3211165pfm.139.2019.08.15.15.54.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:54:13 -0700 From: Emily Shaffer To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bugreport: add tool to generate debugging info Message-ID: <20190815225413.GE208753@google.com> References: <20190815023418.33407-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20190815215225.GB208753@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 03:29:24PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Emily Shaffer writes: > > >> > +NOTE > >> > +---- > >> > +Bug reports can be sent to git@vger.kernel.org. > >> > >> I am not sure if this belongs here. > > > > Sure, I wasn't certain either. Would you rather I remove the "what to do > > with this bugreport" NOTE section entirely? > > Not really. You are invoking an editor to let the user edit the > pre-populated report, and I would imagine that a comment in that > file would be the best place to give instructions, not a manpage > for "git bugreport" command. Oh, I see! In that case, do you still want the Git mailing list address shown in the report text? > > > So, what's your suggestion? Not to check the output at all? (This may > > actually be fine; it occurred to me while reading your review that if a > > user is filing a bug report about something, one of the diagnostic > > commands in bugreport might be what's broken for them. So perhaps it > > should be tolerant to missing information...) > > Right. Ok, will do.