Re: "If you're still seeing problems, please reopen." [Was: bug#25148:]

[Michael Heerdegen]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

> What exactly would it be good for users to know?
> When and how can we tell them?

There is another, related problem (it was already posted to this group
but got no answers):

M-x report-emacs-bug is not even always a good way to file Emacs bug
reports.  For example, the org developers wish that org related bug
reports appear in their own list - org-mode bugs reported to
gnu.emacs.bug get no attention for years.

This works automatically when you use M-x org-submit-bug-report - but I
didn't find that command, even though I searched for it, because the
name doesn't fit the naming scheme report-.*-bug.  Other users will not
even know that some packages may have special commands for bug reporting.

And other Emacs packages use even different naming schemes:

calc-report-bug
reftex-report-bug
eshell-report-bug
gnuplot-bug-report
c-submit-bug-report

Though several modes are also using the naming similar to
org-submit-bug-report:

c-submit-bug-report
diredp-send-bug-report
org-edna-submit-bug-report

Citing more text from Ihor's original message:

| I am thinking if it would make sense to develop more standardised
| command name conventions for bug reporting and add them to
| (elisp)Emacs Lisp:Preparing Lisp code for distribution
|
| Then, the built-in emacs packages might be changed to follow those
| conventions and improve discoverability of bug reporting capabilities.
|
| Also, an information that different major modes may have they own bug
| reporting tools might be mentioned in the default template shown in
| report-emacs-bug.
|
| What do you think?

I think this is a problem that also confuses and discourages users to
make bug reports, so - any opinions?

Oh, and a happy New Year to all of you!

Michael.