Can we please stop with the stupid add you Xorg.log canned response to X and OpenGL bugs?

[Hans de Goede]

Hi all,

A couple of days ago I filed this (fairly detailed bug):
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=304551

About opengl rendering problems with a certain app on an other wise perfectly 
fine working opengl setup, and explaining that downgrading mesa-libGL and not 
making any other changes fixes this. Notice the and not making any other 
changes. Iow this is in no way a configuration problem.

So I got his canned response:
"Thanks for the bug report. We have reviewed the information you have provided
above, and there is some additional information we require that will be helpful
in our diagnosis of this issue.

Please attach your X server config file (/etc/X11/xorg.conf) and X server log
file (/var/log/Xorg.*.log) to the bug report as individual uncompressed file
attachments using the bugzilla file attachment link below.

Could you please also try to run without any /etc/X11/xorg.conf whatsoever and
let X11 autodetect your display and video card? Attach to this bug
/var/log/Xorg.0.log from this attempt as well, please.

We will review this issue again once you've had a chance to attach this 
information.

Thanks in advance."

Which is not the first time, and which just plain sucks! This looks as if it 
was added without even taken a look at the bug, as the requested info ranges 
from little relevant to compeltely unrelevant. This does not motivate me (at 
all) to take the time to fill proper detailed bug reports!

So can we please stop with this kind of canned responses, I understand they can 
be usefull but before adding them atleast read the bug and consider if they are 
relevant.

Thanks & Regards,

Hans

[Tom Callaway]

Thanks for the bug report. We have reviewed the information you have
provided above, and there is some additional information we require that
will be helpful in our diagnosis of this issue.

Please attach your X server config file (/etc/X11/xorg.conf) and X
server log file (/var/log/Xorg.*.log) to the bug report as individual
uncompressed file attachments using the bugzilla file attachment link
below.

Could you please also try to run without any /etc/X11/xorg.conf
whatsoever and let X11 autodetect your display and video card? Attach to
this bug /var/log/Xorg.0.log from this attempt as well, please.

We will review this issue again once you've had a chance to attach this 
information.

Thanks in advance.

(sorry, couldn't resist)

~spot

[Matej Cepl]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:04:15 +0200, Hans de Goede scripst:
>  A couple of days ago I filed this (fairly detailed bug):
>  https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=304551
>  
>  About opengl rendering problems with a certain app on an other wise
>  perfectly fine working opengl setup, and explaining that downgrading
>  mesa-libGL and not making any other changes fixes this. Notice the and
>  not making any other changes. Iow this is in no way a configuration
>  problem. 
When I was asking you about these two files (how difficult it is attach 
instead of this bitching on the list?), I was not that much concerned 
with the configuration of your computer (although, it may be nice to see 
whether you haven't done something entirely stupid there) as much I was 
interested in what xorg thinks your hardware is, whether it isn't 
possible that some hardware failure happens, whatever. And of course, it 
was easier for me to use canned text which includes both of these files. 
Again, how difficult is it just to attach two files?

Now, to the whole idea of canned comments. If I had enough time to write 
nice novels about each bug, I would certainly did, and believe Dickens 
would envy the beauty of my prose. However, I am the only bugmaster for 
all Xorg/Gecko/Evolution/OpenOffice bugs (not dealing with each of these 
groups with same level of thoroughness) and I have to deal with hundreds 
of bug comments every day. If you want to have more beautiful comments in 
bugzilla, you are very welcome to contact me and help me bug triaging all 
those desktop bugs.

Best,

Matěj

[Hans de Goede]

Matej Cepl wrote:
>  On Fri, 28 Sep 2007 17:04:15 +0200, Hans de Goede scripst:
> > A couple of days ago I filed this (fairly detailed bug):
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=304551
> >
> > About opengl rendering problems with a certain app on an other wise
> > perfectly fine working opengl setup, and explaining that downgrading
> > mesa-libGL and not making any other changes fixes this. Notice the and
> > not making any other changes. Iow this is in no way a configuration
> > problem.
>  
>  When I was asking you about these two files (how difficult it is attach 
>  instead of this bitching on the list?) 
You were not asking me to simply attach 2 files, you were also asking me to 
remove my xorg.conf, restart X (iow logout) and attach the resulting logs of 
that too, after which I probably want to restore xorg.conf again, logout again 
etc. Also this was not the first bug of mine that got this response.

>  Now, to the whole idea of canned comments. If I had enough time to
> write 
>  nice novels about each bug, I would certainly did, and believe Dickens 
>  would envy the beauty of my prose. However, I am the only bugmaster for 
>  all Xorg/Gecko/Evolution/OpenOffice bugs (not dealing with each of these 
>  groups with same level of thoroughness) and I have to deal with hundreds 
>  of bug comments every day. If you want to have more beautiful comments in 
>  bugzilla, you are very welcome to contact me and help me bug triaging all 
>  those desktop bugs. 
I'm not against canned response, for example the canned kernel responses to 
please retry with the latest kernel are fine. As they are on topic. What you 
did is asking for more information and setting the need info status flag on bug 
reports which already include tons of info:
-which card I'm using
-what is the last known version of the affected package where it worked, and
  the first version where it breaks
-Notice I pinpointed it to a single sub-package by demonstrating that the bug
  goes away by downgrading that single package, so I'm also providing accurate
  info as to in which package the bug is
-that it breaks even more in a later version of this package
-that I also filed it upstream including a link to upstreams bug report.

And IMHO asking for more info when I spend a lot of time to file a proper bug 
report is annoying if not just plain rude. IOW its not the canned response that 
annoys me but the total irrelevance of said canned response to the bug report 
in question, esp. after all the time I took to debug this issue myself and to 
file a detailed bug report!

Regards,

Hans