===== Conventions for bug reports =====


==== Creating a bug report ====
I simplified the creation of bug reports a little. Just choose a package from the drop-down box, add a short 
description an hit ''Create Bugreport''. 

Of course, you can still use the manual method, which is below and still worth reading
----
To create a bugreport just create a page. Please try to use the following naming scheme:

<code>
bugs:bugreports:packagename:short_description
</code>

Where 
  * ''packagename'' is the name of the package without version number, e. g. ''rsync'', **not** ''rsync-2.6.8''
  * short_descripton is a **really** short and informative description in telegraphic style, not more than 5 words, e. g.:
    * ''connect_via_ssh_fails''
    * ''segfaults_in_xterm''
    * ''weird_printoutput_on_HPLJ4''
  * If you really need more than 5 words, try to concatenate them, like
    * ''connectto_windowsvistahost_fails_over_wlan''
  * You can give a more readable description in the internal link later

  * **Wrong** descriptions are:
    * ''doesnt_work''
    * ''really_sucks_because_software_xyz_does_this_job_a_hundred_times_better''

First edit [[bugs:bugreports]], copy the last line and change the content as you see fit. Give a readable description, including the name of the package, and most important, give it a bug number. You should give the lowest  bug number available, which is mentioned at the bottom of the page. After this, increase the bugnumber by 1.

Example:
<code>
  * [[bugs:bugreports:rysnc:connect_via_ssh_fails|#24:rsync:Connection via ssh fails]]

**Lowest available bug number:** 25
</code>



Then save the page, click on the newly created entry and choose ''Create this page''.



In the bug report itself you should mention
  * the description of the bug as headline
  * the version number of the package
  * the severity (see below)
  * tags (optional, see below)
  * and, of course, an extensive description under which circumstances the bug appears, how to repdoduce it, log entries, and so on
  * if you already have a solution to solve a bug, you can post it, too :-)
  * short patches (of a source file, a PKGBUILD or similiar) can be posted, but try not to exceed 30 lines. Enclose the patch with the <nowiki><code></nowiki> tags.



==== Reply to a bug report ====
Just insert a horizontal rule below the bug report and add your comments, tags, patches, and so on

==== Severity Levels ====
To simplify matters we will just use a subset of the [[http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities|Debian severity levels]]

  * **critical**: renders a package unusable
  * **normal**: is really annoying, but does not render the package complete unusable
  * **wishlist**: Make a wish ...

If you think, the bug lies somwhere in between these grades, you can use the Debian levels, but this three should suffice


==== Tags ====
Again, we will use a subset of the [[http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#tags|Debian tags]], but extend it with 
some of our own tags.

  * **confirmed**: You have reproduced the bug
  * **unreproducible**: You can't reproduce the bug
  * **fixed**: The bug is fixed (and will be closed)
  * **upstream**: This bug applies to the upstream part of the package. Thus we can't fix it and must wait for upstream
  * **patch**: You know a solution (and share it with us)
  * **workaround**: You know how to avoid the bug
  * **notabug**: This bug is not a bug at all, but a feature, user error or something else (and will be closed)


==== Example ====

<file>
=== foobar: segfaults when creating a connection to a Windows Vista host ===

version: 1.2.3-5

severity: normal

When I try to connect to a Windows Vista host with foobar it segfaults. Here is the debug output:

<code>
[root@deli:/root]# foobar vista.windows.ms.local
resolving vista.windows.ms.local ....
IP: 192.168.1.222
trying to connect to 192.168.1.222 ...
Negotiating...
Segmentation fault
[root@deli:/root]#
</code>
----
tags: confirmed

I can confirm the bug, I reproduced it with a connection to a host  running Windows Vista build 666.
----
tags: patch

I reproduced it too. And I found a solution. The problem is in winconnect.c. Here is a patch:

<code diff>
--- winconnect.c.orig     2004-11-07 13:49:19.926827944 -0600                                                                         
+++ winconnect.c  2004-11-07 13:49:30.113279368 -0600                                                                                 
@@ -103,8 +103,7 @@                                                                                                                 
int ident_winversion(winhost) {

 winver = get_versionstring(winhost);
+            if (winver == "VISTA") {
+               send_port("I LOVE DRM\n");
+            }


</code>
With this patch applied the connection to a Vista host runs without problems.


</file>

[[bugs:bugreports:conventions:example|View this example]]