On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 09:57:57AM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 22.03.21 22:56, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 08:25:15PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> I agree to the last point and yeah, maybe regressions are the more > >> important problem we should work on – at least from the perspective of > >> kernel development. But from the users perspective (and > >> reporting-issues.rst is written for that perspective) it feel a bit > >> unsatisfying to not have a solution to query for existing report, > >> regressions or not. Hmmmm... > > First of all, thanks for working on reporting-issues.rst. > > Thx, very glad to hear that. I didn't get much feedback on it, which > made me wonder if anybody besides docs folks actually looked at it... I'll admit that I had missed your initial submission, but having looked at it, while I could imagine some nits where it could be improved, in my opinion, it's strictly better than the older reporting-bugs doc. > Hmmm, yeah, I like that idea. I'll keep it in mind for later: I would > prefer to get reporting-issues.rst officially blessed and > reporting-bugs.rst gone before working on further enhancements. Is there anyone following this thread who believes that there is anything we should change *before* oficially blessing reporting-issues.rst? Given that Konstantin has already linked to reporting-issues from the front page of kernel.bugzilla.org, I think we we should just go ahead and officially bless it and be done with it. :-) Once it is blessed, I'd also suggest putting a link to https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/reporting-issues.html as an "other resources" at https://www.kernel.org. - Ted
