Re: 1.4 updates

[Dan Mueth <d-mueth uchicago edu>]

On Fri, 6 Oct 2000, Alexander Kirillov wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 10:56:32AM +0100, John Sheehan Sun Microsystems Ireland wrote:
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Definitely users should have a facility to give feedback to the 
> > developers.  
> > 
> > But bug-reports and product support can have a channel other than 
> > directly back to the developers.  As Gnome becomes ever more pervasive,
> > the developers will not wish to deal with every bug report.  That is 
> > the job of intervening support groups who typically address and filter 
> > out all but the most complex problems which they might send on to the 
> > developers
> 
> 
> I am not saying this is a bad idea. I am just saying that it is not to
> us - doc writers - to decide this; I'd like to see this discussed by
> developers/maintainers before we start implementing this. 
> 
> Yes, I understand that any company can change the feedback addresses
> in the docs they ship without asking anyone's permission - this is
> what FDL is about...

How bug reports are handled is up to the developers.  If the GNOME
developers want all bug reports which go to Sun to also go to them, I'm
sure bug-buddy could be made to do this or that Sun would be happy to
bounce a copy over to them.  And if the GNOME developers and Sun cannot
come to an agreement here, leaving entities out of our docs will not force
Sun (or Red Hat or HP or IBM or Debian or ...) to do things one way or the
other.  They could trivially write a script to replace these chunks or pay
somebody to do it by hand.

It makes sense to leave these boiler-plate parts as entities simply
because it makes the docs smaller and it makes these boiler-plate parts
easier to maintain and translate.

As Sasha points out, somebody at Sun should post a message to
gnome-devel-list or gnome-hackers proposing how bugs should be handled so
that a mutually agreed-upon solution can be sought.

Dan