php.net |  support |  documentation |  report a bug |  advanced search |  search howto |  statistics |  random bug |  login
Bug #6508 Testing recent modifications to the bug report system
Submitted: 2000-09-03 01:32 UTC Modified: 2000-09-07 16:15 UTC
From: zak@php.net Assigned:
Status: Closed Package: Unknown/Other Function
PHP Version: 4.0.2 OS: n/a
Private report: No CVE-ID: None
View Add Comment Developer Edit
Welcome! If you don't have a Git account, you can't do anything here.
You can add a comment by following this link or if you reported this bug, you can edit this bug over here.
(description)
Block user comment
Status: Assign to:
Package:
Bug Type:
Summary:
From: zak@php.net
New email:
PHP Version: OS:

 

 [2000-09-03 01:32 UTC] zak@php.net
This is a test, do not adjust your email client.

Patches

Add a Patch

Pull Requests

Add a Pull Request

History

AllCommentsChangesGit/SVN commitsRelated reports
 [2000-09-03 01:33 UTC] zak@php.net
This is another test.
 [2000-09-03 01:35 UTC] zak@php.net
This is a developer modifying the bug - the complete history of the bug should be sent to the dev list. (xing fingers :)
 [2000-09-03 01:56 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:00 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:05 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:08 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:09 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:09 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:10 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:11 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:19 UTC] zak@php.net
test
 [2000-09-03 02:20 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:20 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:22 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:23 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:26 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:30 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:43 UTC] zak@php.net
test test
 [2000-09-03 02:43 UTC] zak@php.net
user test
 [2000-09-03 02:53 UTC] zak@php.net
test test test
 [2000-09-03 03:04 UTC] zak@php.net
test test test
 [2000-09-03 03:05 UTC] zak@php.net
Hoping this is the final test
 [2000-09-03 03:19 UTC] zak@php.net
Developer-edit test of the live modification to the bug report system.
 [2000-09-03 03:19 UTC] zak@php.net
User-edit test...
 [2000-09-03 14:51 UTC] zak@php.net
more tests
 [2000-09-03 14:55 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 15:04 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 15:21 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 15:30 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 15:48 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 15:56 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 16:06 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 16:09 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 16:10 UTC] zak@php.net
YAT
 [2000-09-03 16:21 UTC] zak@php.net
Test of the recent changes to the bug report system.
 [2000-09-05 23:11 UTC] zak@php.net
A test of the length truncation of the bugs.php mailout script.

- Zak
 [2000-09-05 23:17 UTC] zak@php.net
Well, it did not seem to prematurely truncate anything.

Let's drop in a big glob of text, submit it and then submit another report and see what happens.

Excerpt from "Netiquette" by Virginia Shea:

The golden rule your parents and your kindergarten teacher taught you was pretty simple: Do unto others as you'd have others do unto you. Imagine how you'd feel if you were in the other person's shoes. Stand up for yourself, but try not to hurt people's feelings. 

In cyberspace, we state this in an even more basic manner: Remember the human. 

When you communicate electronically, all you see is a computer screen. You don't have the opportunity to use facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice to communicate your meaning; words -- lonely written words -- are all you've got. And that goes for your correspondent as well. 

When you're holding a conversation online -- whether it's an email exchange or a response to a discussion group posting -- it's easy to misinterpret your correspondent's meaning. And it's frighteningly easy to forget that your correspondent is a person with feelings more or less like your own. 

It's ironic, really. Computer networks bring people together who'd otherwise never meet. But the impersonality of the medium changes that meeting to something less -- well, less personal. Humans exchanging email often behave the way some people behind the wheel of a car do: They curse at other drivers, make obscene gestures, and generally behave like savages. Most of them would never act that way at work or at home. But the interposition of the machine seems to make it acceptable. 

The message of Netiquette is that it's not acceptable. Yes, use your network connections to express yourself freely, explore strange new worlds, and boldly go where you've never gone before. But remember the Prime Directive of Netiquette: Those are real people out there. 

Would you say it to the person's face? 

Writer and Macintosh evangelist Guy Kawasaki tells a story about getting email from some fellow he's never met. Online, this fellow tells Guy that he's a bad writer with nothing interesting to say. 

Unbelievably rude? Yes, but unfortunately, it happens all the time in cyberspace. 

Maybe it's the awesome power of being able to send mail directly to a well-known writer like Guy. Maybe it's the fact that you can't see his face crumple in misery as he reads your cruel words. Whatever the reason, it's incredibly common. 

Guy proposes a useful test for anything you're about to post or mail: Ask yourself, "Would I say this to the person's face?" If the answer is no, rewrite and reread. Repeat the process till you feel sure that you'd feel as comfortable saying these words to the live person as you do sending them through cyberspace. 

Of course, it's possible that you'd feel great about saying something extremely rude to the person's face. In that case, Netiquette can't help you. Go get a copy of Miss Manners' Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. 

Another reason not to be offensive online 

When you communicate through cyberspace -- via email or on discussion groups -- your words are written. And chances are they're stored somewhere where you have no control over them. In other words, there's a good chance they can come back to haunt you. 

Never forget the story of famous email user Oliver North. Ollie, you'll remember, was a great devotee of the White House email system, PROFS. He diligently deleted all incriminating notes he sent or received. What he didn't realize was that, somewhere else in the White House, computer room staff were equally diligently backing up the mainframe where his messages were stored. When he went on trial, all those handy backup tapes were readily available as evidence against him. 

You don't have to be engaged in criminal activity to want to be careful. Any message you send could be saved or forwarded by its recipient. You have no control over where it goes. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 [2000-09-05 23:28 UTC] zak@php.net
Errr.... sorry folks, 10k is much bigger than one thinks it is.

Extra content to get above 10k - More excerpts from "Netiquette" by Virginia Shea:

Rule 4: Respect other people's time and bandwidth
It's a clich? that people today seem to have less time than ever before, even though (or perhaps because) we sleep less and have more labor-saving devices than our grandparents did. When you send email or post to a discussion group, you're taking up other people's time (or hoping to). It's your responsibility to ensure that the time they spend reading your posting isn't wasted. 

The word "bandwidth" is sometimes used synonymously with time, but it's really a different thing. Bandwidth is the information-carrying capacity of the wires and channels that connect everyone in cyberspace. There's a limit to the amount of data that any piece of wiring can carry at any given moment -- even a state-of-the-art fiber-optic cable. The word "bandwidth" is also sometimes used to refer to the storage capacity of a host system. When you accidentally post the same note to the same newsgroup five times, you are wasting both time (of the people who check all five copies of the posting) and bandwidth (by sending repetitive information over the wires and requiring it to be stored somewhere). 

You are not the center of cyberspace 

Presumably, this reminder will be superfluous to most readers. But I include it anyway, because when you're working hard on a project and deeply involved in it, it's easy to forget that other people have concerns other than yours. So don't expect instant responses to all your questions, and don't assume that all readers will agree with -- or care about -- your passionate arguments. 

Rules for discussion groups 

Rule 4 has a number of implications for discussion group users. Most discussion group readers are already spending too much time sitting at the computer; their significant others, families, and roommates are drumming their fingers, wondering when to serve dinner, while those network maniacs are catching up on the latest way to housebreak a puppy or cook zucchini. 

And many news-reading programs are slow, so just opening a posted note or article can take a while. Then the reader has to wade through all the header information to get to the meat of the message. No one is pleased when it turns out not to be worth the trouble. See "Netiquette for Discussion Groups" on page 65 for detailed rules. 

To whom should messages be directed? (Or why "mailing list" could become a dirty word) 

In the old days, people made copies with carbon paper. You could only make about five legible copies. So you thought good and hard about who you wanted to send those five copies to. 

Today, it's as easy to copy practically anyone on your mail as it is not to. And we sometimes find ourselves copying people almost out of habit. In general, this is rude. People have less time than ever today, precisely because they have so much information to absorb. Before you copy people on your messages, ask yourself whether they really need to know. If the answer is no, don't waste their time. If the answer is maybe, think twice before you hit the send key. 

Rule 5: Make yourself look good online
Take advantage of your anonymity 

I don't want to give the impression that the net is a cold, cruel place full of people who just can't wait to insult each other. As in the world at large, most people who communicate online just want to be liked. Networks -- particularly discussion groups -- let you reach out to people you'd otherwise never meet. And none of them can see you. You won't be judged by the color of your skin, eyes, or hair, your weight, your age, or your clothing. 

You will, however, be judged by the quality of your writing. For most people who choose to communicate online, this is an advantage; if they didn't enjoy using the written word, they wouldn't be there. So spelling and grammar do count. 

If you're spending a lot of time on the net and you're shaky in these areas, it's worth brushing up on them. There are plenty of books available, but you'll learn more -- and possibly have more fun -- if you take a course. If you're an older adult , you don't have to take a "bonehead grammar" course with a bunch of bored teenagers. Instead, look for courses on proofreading and copyediting; they usually cover the basic rules of grammar pretty thoroughly, and they'll be filled with motivated students who are there because they want to be. Check your local community college and university extension catalogs -- you'll be amazed at what they offer. A side benefit is that taking courses involves meeting people you can actually see. 

Know what you're talking about and make sense 

Pay attention to the content of your writing. Be sure you know what you're talking about -- when you see yourself writing "it's my understanding that" or "I believe it's the case," ask yourself whether you really want to post this note before checking your facts. Bad information propagates like wildfire on the net. And once it's been through two or three iterations, you get the same distortion effect as in the party game "Operator": Whatever you originally said may be unrecognizable. (Of course, you could take this as a reason not to worry about the accuracy of your postings. But you're only responsible for what you post yourself, not for what anyone else does with it.) 

In addition, make sure your notes are clear and logical. It's perfectly possible to write a paragraph that contains no errors in grammar or spelling, but still makes no sense whatsoever. This is most likely to happen when you're trying to impress someone by using a lot of long words that you don't really understand yourself. Trust me -- no one worth impressing will be impressed. It's better to keep it simple. 

Don't post flame-bait 

Finally, be pleasant and polite. Don't use offensive language, and don't be confrontational for the sake of confrontation. 

Q. Is swearing acceptable on the net? 

Only in those areas where sewage is considered an art form, e.g., the USENET newsgroup alt.tasteless. Usually, if you feel that cursing in some form is required, it's preferable to use amusing euphemisms like "effing" and "sugar." You may also use the classic asterisk filler -- for example, s***. The archness is somehow appropriate to the net, and you avoid offending anyone needlessly. And everyone will know exactly what you mean. 





 [2000-09-05 23:29 UTC] zak@php.net
Ok - now the comments for this report should get truncated.

If not, I will test off of the dev list....
 [2000-09-06 22:37 UTC] zak@php.net
Test of most recent trivial modification to bug system...
 [2000-09-07 16:15 UTC] zak@php.net
A test of the recent changes....
 
PHP Copyright © 2001-2020 The PHP Group
All rights reserved.
Last updated: Mon Oct 26 14:01:26 2020 UTC