New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introduce issue templates #549
Conversation
GitHub has updated issue template interface, let's use them.
You suggest to remove "openssl/boringssl/i don't know" question? |
Co-Authored-By: vixentael <vixentael@users.noreply.github.com>
Yeah. I’ve looked through recent bug reports and don’t see any where this actually mattered. Either the issue was entirely unrelated to the backend, or the submitting person experienced an issue with specific backend and explicitly submitted an issue about that. I think, in general case it will be enough to know the platform and whether Themis has been installed via the package manager or compiled from source to triage the issue. |
And while we’re here, let’s add a template for pull requests as well. I don’t think that we have that many PRs to mandate a formal structure, but it would be nice to have a check list of important things: like, don’t forget to write unit tests, update changelog, eat your veggies, etc. |
It should be obvious from the displayed integration, and merges are usually safeguarded against accidentally merging a branch that has failed CI.
Probably we should add also |
maybe just as simple as
but it's valid only for desktop/server side platforms |
|
|
I’m not sure that arch will be of significant help for bug reports. It certainly can be important (like that one time, @vixentael 😉), but I doubt that we’ll have a constant stream of diverse architecture-specific issues. It’s not a safety check list written in blood for us to include every minor detail and turn it into 50-item questionnaire for the users to fill out. If anything, instead of that I’d rather add a separate Device entry for mobile users, where the architectures are the most diverse. This will be more useful indicator of whether we can reproduce the environment precisely or will have to go with "idk, works on my phone *shrug*, could you please double-check everything?" |
I'm not sure if @shadinua actually wanted to see device model rather than x32/x64 CPU architecture. I agree that having 50-items questionnaire is "too much", but I'd rather want to understand x32/x64. Suggestion: change |
Well, technically on x86 it’s possible to run 32-bit kernel on 64-bit hardware, or compile and run 32-bit applications with 64-bit kernel... Anyhow, this is pedantry which does not get us anywhere. We don’t have many bug reports filed, so I don’t have any data to argue which template would be ‘the best’. How about the following:
is everyone happy with this wording? P.S. I hate how the internet is filled with x32, x86, i386, i686, IA-32, x64, x86_64, AMD64, which are similar or sometimes the same, but not quite the same, and everybody (including me) has an opinion which one is the correct spelling for the architecture. And on top of that, Linux has x32 which is an obscure ABI, not quite what you think it is. |
yes, let's do it |
Hm... the pull request template does not work for some reason, but we’re doing it according to the docs 🤔 |
Maybe, we should name it |
It seems that we need to have it under I’ll fix that up in master branch (without a PR). |
GitHub has updated issue template interface, let's use them.