Hi all,
I would like to recommend that the following text from the R Posting
Guide be placed on the R Bug submission page in the section "Submit New
Reports", which would read as follows:
Submit New Reports
You can submit new bug reports either using an online form by clicking
on the button below or by sending email to r-bugs at biostat.ku.dk.
Before you post a real bug report, make sure you read R Bugs in the
R-faq. If you're not completely and utterly sure something is a bug,
post a question to r-help, not a bug report to r-bugs - every bug report
requires manual action by one of the R-core members.
If you wish to comment upon an existing report, you cannot do that via
the web interface. Instead send an email to the above address with the
Subject: header containing (PR#999) -- replace 999 with actual report
number, of course.
Perhaps reading that brief middle section, without having to click to
another page, will help to reduce user error reports going to R Bugs and
save members of R Core some time.
Also, as a quick pointer, I noted that there is a repeated word ("for")
on the R Home Page in the "Getting Started" box:
R is a free software environment _for for_ statistical computing and
graphics. It compiles and runs on a wide variety of UNIX platforms,
Windows and MacOS. To download R, please choose your preferred CRAN
mirror.
Best regards,
Marc Schwartz
Suggestion for the R Bugs web page
7 messages · Martin Maechler, Peter Dalgaard, Marc Schwartz
Thank you, Marc, for your suggestion.
"Marc" == Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mednetstudy.com>
on Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:15:00 -0500 writes:
Marc> Hi all,
Marc> I would like to recommend that the following text from the R Posting
Marc> Guide be placed on the R Bug submission page in the section "Submit New
Marc> Reports", which would read as follows:
Marc> Submit New Reports
Marc> You can submit new bug reports either using an online form by clicking
Marc> on the button below or by sending email to r-bugs at biostat.ku.dk.
actually, nobody should advertize that e-mail (but maybe those
at ku.dk, when they talk about it inside DK),
but rather r-bugs at r-project.org .
The advantage of the latter is its "genericity" and the fact
that mails are filtered a bit more.
Marc> Before you post a real bug report, make sure you read R Bugs in the
Marc> R-faq. If you're not completely and utterly sure something is a bug,
Marc> post a question to r-help, not a bug report to r-bugs - every bug report
Marc> requires manual action by one of the R-core members.
Marc> If you wish to comment upon an existing report, you cannot do that via
Marc> the web interface. Instead send an email to the above address with the
Marc> Subject: header containing (PR#999) -- replace 999 with actual report
Marc> number, of course.
------------
Marc> Perhaps reading that brief middle section, without having to click to
Marc> another page, will help to reduce user error reports going to R Bugs and
Marc> save members of R Core some time.
Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered
complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which
would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
Marc> Also, as a quick pointer, I noted that there is a repeated word ("for")
Marc> on the R Home Page in the "Getting Started" box:
> R is a free software environment _for for_ statistical computing and
> graphics. It compiles and runs on a wide variety of UNIX platforms,
> Windows and MacOS. To download R, please choose your preferred CRAN
> mirror.
I've fixed that one --- haven't checked for how many months this
has remained unreported....
Thank you, Marc!
Martin
Marc> Best regards,
Marc> Marc Schwartz
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 18:51 +0200, Martin Maechler wrote:
Thank you, Marc, for your suggestion.
My pleasure Martin.
"Marc" == Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mednetstudy.com>
on Wed, 22 Jun 2005 10:15:00 -0500 writes:
Marc> Hi all,
Marc> I would like to recommend that the following text from the R Posting
Marc> Guide be placed on the R Bug submission page in the section "Submit New
Marc> Reports", which would read as follows:
Marc> Submit New Reports
Marc> You can submit new bug reports either using an online form by clicking
Marc> on the button below or by sending email to r-bugs at biostat.ku.dk.
actually, nobody should advertize that e-mail (but maybe those
at ku.dk, when they talk about it inside DK),
but rather r-bugs at r-project.org .
The advantage of the latter is its "genericity" and the fact
that mails are filtered a bit more.
That e-mail above (biostat.ku.dk) is the one presently on the R Bugs page (both the text and the mailto: link).
Marc> Before you post a real bug report, make sure you read R Bugs in the
Marc> R-faq. If you're not completely and utterly sure something is a bug,
Marc> post a question to r-help, not a bug report to r-bugs - every bug report
Marc> requires manual action by one of the R-core members.
Marc> If you wish to comment upon an existing report, you cannot do that via
Marc> the web interface. Instead send an email to the above address with the
Marc> Subject: header containing (PR#999) -- replace 999 with actual report
Marc> number, of course.
------------
Marc> Perhaps reading that brief middle section, without having to click to
Marc> another page, will help to reduce user error reports going to R Bugs and
Marc> save members of R Core some time.
Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered
complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which
would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
Bugzilla? ;-) JitterBug of course is no longer actively maintained by the Samba folks.
Marc> Also, as a quick pointer, I noted that there is a repeated word ("for")
Marc> on the R Home Page in the "Getting Started" box:
> R is a free software environment _for for_ statistical computing and
> graphics. It compiles and runs on a wide variety of UNIX platforms,
> Windows and MacOS. To download R, please choose your preferred CRAN
> mirror.
I've fixed that one --- haven't checked for how many months this has remained unreported.... Thank you, Marc! Martin
You are welcome Martin. I don't often go to the main page, as I have specific pages bookmarked in Firefox. It just happened to catch my eye. Marc
Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
Bugzilla? ;-) JitterBug of course is no longer actively maintained by the Samba folks.
X-actly. No need for the smiley. Apart from the maintenance issue, we also have the problem of spam injection, aggravated by the fact that Jitterbug is chopping headers off incoming mail, so that it looks like it comes from us. We did get blackholed at one point - the entire pubhealth department... It would be a no-brainer to switch to Bugzilla, were it not for the 3000 or so messages that are already sitting in the Jitterbug database.
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard ?ster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 21:15 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
Bugzilla? ;-) JitterBug of course is no longer actively maintained by the Samba folks.
X-actly. No need for the smiley. Apart from the maintenance issue, we also have the problem of spam injection, aggravated by the fact that Jitterbug is chopping headers off incoming mail, so that it looks like it comes from us. We did get blackholed at one point - the entire pubhealth department...
Ouch. That's not good. Perhaps that's one of many reasons that the Samba folks themselves have switched to Bugzilla?
It would be a no-brainer to switch to Bugzilla, were it not for the 3000 or so messages that are already sitting in the Jitterbug database.
Might the python script linked at the follow Bugzilla report be of use? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124869 See the attachment in Comment #1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=69233 as the author's web site link appears to be offline. I don't know python, so I would defer to others with more expertise as to whether the above is useful "as is", or might serve as a starting point. Marc
Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 21:15 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
Note that we (well, primarily Peter Dalgaard) have considered complete changes to the R-bugs "system" anyway some of which would obliterate the e-mail interface completely IIRC.
Bugzilla? ;-) JitterBug of course is no longer actively maintained by the Samba folks.
X-actly. No need for the smiley. Apart from the maintenance issue, we also have the problem of spam injection, aggravated by the fact that Jitterbug is chopping headers off incoming mail, so that it looks like it comes from us. We did get blackholed at one point - the entire pubhealth department...
Ouch. That's not good.
Fortunately, we got pulled out of the hole relatively fast, because Duncan Murdoch knew the mechanisms. And fortunately, not every recipient uses those blackhole lists.
Perhaps that's one of many reasons that the Samba folks themselves have switched to Bugzilla?
Andrew Tridgell will have known about the lack of maintenance for a while... The idea of putting a public mailing list into the loop wasn't part of the original design. The code to prevent duplicates from messages sent to both r-bugs and r-devel was a local hack.
It would be a no-brainer to switch to Bugzilla, were it not for the 3000 or so messages that are already sitting in the Jitterbug database.
Might the python script linked at the follow Bugzilla report be of use? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124869 See the attachment in Comment #1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=69233 as the author's web site link appears to be offline. I don't know python, so I would defer to others with more expertise as to whether the above is useful "as is", or might serve as a starting point.
Yes, I got the bright idea of googling for "jitterbug bugzilla" just after replying as well... It does look quite useful. Not that I speak Python either (Monty excepted), but the scheme he has been converting from - status encoded in the directory name - is quite similar to our slightly simpler Foo/Foo-fixed convention.
O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard ?ster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph: (+45) 35327918 ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard at biostat.ku.dk) FAX: (+45) 35327907
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 22:06 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
Marc Schwartz <MSchwartz at mn.rr.com> writes:
On Wed, 2005-06-22 at 21:15 +0200, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
It would be a no-brainer to switch to Bugzilla, were it not for the 3000 or so messages that are already sitting in the Jitterbug database.
Might the python script linked at the follow Bugzilla report be of use? https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124869 See the attachment in Comment #1: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/attachment.cgi?id=69233 as the author's web site link appears to be offline. I don't know python, so I would defer to others with more expertise as to whether the above is useful "as is", or might serve as a starting point.
Yes, I got the bright idea of googling for "jitterbug bugzilla" just after replying as well... It does look quite useful. Not that I speak Python either (Monty excepted), but the scheme he has been converting from - status encoded in the directory name - is quite similar to our slightly simpler Foo/Foo-fixed convention.
Well, hopefully that might work with only modest alteration then, enabling a less painful transition. Pending further review of course... Marc "Follow. But! Follow only if ye be men of valor, for the entrance to this cave is guarded by a creature so foul, so cruel that no man yet has fought with it and lived! Bones of full fifty men lie strewn about its lair. So, brave knights, if you do doubt your courage or your strength, come no further, for death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth."