patch, 2 partsimprove bugreports

Let's try to improve the readability of the bug reports we receive.

The first message should not receive many comments. The second one might. I'm open to suggestions.

Thanks.

Rubén Justo (2):
  bugreport: add a new line between questions
  bugreport: add a mark to each proposed questions

 builtin/bugreport.c  | 16 ++++++++--------
 t/t0091-bugreport.sh | 12 ++++++++----
 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

Occasionally, we receive reports where the user have filled in the blank line we provide between each proposed question, without leaving any space between the answer and the next question. This makes reading the report uncomfortable.

Perhaps we can suggest to the user to include a blank line if we duplicate the empty line we provide. Let's do that and see what happens.

Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
---
 builtin/bugreport.c  | 8 ++++----
 t/t0091-bugreport.sh | 4 ++++
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Include a mark in the questions we provide, to enhance the readability of the reports we receive.

Of course, the user has the flexibility to choose a different format or rewrite the report entirely. However, including these marks in the template may suggest that we value some structure in the message.

Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com>
---
 builtin/bugreport.c  | 8 ++++----
 t/t0091-bugreport.sh | 8 ++++----
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024, at 18:36, Rubén Justo wrote:

I like this. The questions and the answers not being differentiated makes things harder to read.

On 1/4/24 21:30, Kristoffer Haugsbakk wrote:

Thanks for your response.

On Sat, Mar 23, 2024 at 06:32:35PM +0100, Rubén Justo wrote:

This series received no response. One option may be because it went unnoticed, another because it may not add value. I'm going to give it another try and I'll quietly :-) take silence as confirmation of the second option.

I'll try to increase the chances of getting a "looks good" by CC'ing some folks involved in the bugreport tool.

Thanks.

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 3:04 AM Rubén Justo <rjusto@gmail.com> wrote:

For what it's worth, when I read the cover letter of this series, I thought it was going to clean up the list of questions to eliminate redundancy. In particular, of the three questions:

   What did you expect to happen?
   What happened instead?
   What's different between what you expected
        and what actually happened?

the final one seems to repeat what the first two ask, and it is common when answering the third question for people to simply repeat what was said in response to an earlier question.

Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> writes:

The third one may need to be rephrased, but I think it should still be there. The intent is to make the reporter realize how unhelpful their answers are when they answer the first two questions with

 - I expected it to work correctly
 - It did not work correctly

They hopefully would realize that "work correctly" needs to be elaborated in order to answer the third question in a useful way. If the first two questions have been answered in a usable way, the third one is often redundant.

On Sun, Mar 31, 2024 at 11:09:02PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:

Certainly, a diagnostic questionnaire can always be improved. Unfortunately I do not have a better wording to offer here to reduce that sense of repetition.

Thanks for your response.