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=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham 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 298371F45A for ; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 22:29:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1733094AbfHOW32 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:29:28 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60609 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1733079AbfHOW32 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:29:28 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 037FF160854; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:29:26 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=ysmMmbaWyTURNkvgucVecYYOX+U=; b=USsfVL UR05edONxsrXQ2NeG9ZemtDvTCe+uU00f4rZ71A4Y7Z4YAKD1XMVzjWWJR/z7po+ QCYF/X/AF1GNxFssQ3HevK82OxMMJvIQZssldQF9mwKsRpy1a2Juo6d7AfunLg71 y06ZguVvjAfxhgTE/gE1UgvoT+vpRvZgj5U8U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=mknp9LD0Ppqwt7E8SDMDNtxIe/wN3cGP b6qG+WK3Nd/hUK/C4Ar6rWfyI2H2OFFyhi1EJAdDofJgyJwlvxnVaibLCo6Xk6p8 AwZwYDeYZk1zBC+TqEbKIQMx1MMWmltAzB9URk4kMVJt8Hv7q4omWyjWb0/85p9H b5vTIWoWjME= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1AD160853; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A94F160851; Thu, 15 Aug 2019 18:29:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emily Shaffer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] bugreport: add tool to generate debugging info References: <20190815023418.33407-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20190815215225.GB208753@google.com> Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2019 15:29:24 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190815215225.GB208753@google.com> (Emily Shaffer's message of "Thu, 15 Aug 2019 14:52:25 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 22FDDF44-BFAC-11E9-8759-72EEE64BB12D-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org 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. > 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.