Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] GitLab: Add "Bug" issue reporting template

[Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1443 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 12:09:47PM -0400, John Snow wrote:
> On 6/2/21 5:22 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 01:38:17PM -0400, John Snow wrote:
> > > +## Host environment
> > > + - Operating system: (Windows 10 21H1, Fedora 34, etc.)
> > > + - OS/kernel version: (For POSIX hosts, use `uname -a`)
> > > + - Architecture: (x86, ARM, s390x, etc.)
> > > + - QEMU flavor: (qemu-system-x86_64, qemu-aarch64, qemu-img, etc.)
> > 
> > Is this necessary since we ask for the command-line below?
> > 
> 
> Not strictly, IF the entire form is filled out. I had noticed some bugs in
> gitlab where reporters seem to be aware of what kind of QEMU they are
> running, but are unable to procure the command line invocation. (it is being
> launched through docker, virsh, etc.) *
> 
> It's redundant, but I am operating on the belief that the CLI may not always
> be available. I don't expect people to not file a bug because they can't
> find it.
> 
> I think of it as a prompt to get a more detailed report on the first try. Is
> it worth keeping?
> 
> *(Aside: maybe a wiki "how to report a bug" page could have a small section
> on identifying the command line arguments when QEMU is being launched via
> vmm/boxes/virsh/docker and so on.)

It didn't occur to me that the fields were optional :).

For me personally, long bug reporting templates reduce the chance that I
will report a bug.

Stefan

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]