Re: [RFC PATCH v2 00/26] Make reporting-bugs easier to grasp and yet more detailed & helpful

[Randy Dunlap]

On 11/21/20 9:33 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am 20.11.20 um 22:58 schrieb Jonathan Corbet:
>> On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 11:46:07 +0100
>> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Am 19.11.20 um 01:29 schrieb Jonathan Corbet:
>>>> On Sun, 15 Nov 2020 11:13:52 +0100
>>>> Thorsten Leemhuis <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>>    - Collapse the whole thing down to a patch adding reporting-bugs-v2.rst
>>>>      (or some suitable name).  I do wonder if it should also move to the
>>>>      process manual as part of this; not only admins will report bugs.
>>> After a night's sleep and Randy's comment I for now settled on
>>> Documentation/admin-guide/reporting-issues.rst
>> Keeping it in the admin guide is OK.  Not sure about the name, though; if
>> you're really dead set against bugs, maybe reporting-problems.rst?
> 
> Well, I'm not dead set against bugs, but it somehow seems wrong to me: people have problems/issues they deal with, which in the end might turn out to not be a bug/error in the code at all. That afaics why tracker software for such reports is often called "issue tracker" instead of "bug tracker" (and nearly nobody calls them problem trackers afaics).. That's why I went with "issues" in the name and the text.
> 
> But in the end I'm not a native English speaker, so I guess it's better if I follow advice from those. Randy, what would you choose?

I'm fine with "issues."

I do recall that at my first job (that was in the previous century or
previous millennium) they were called "trouble reports."  :)

-- 
~Randy