Quoting Armin Ronacher
Armin Ronacher expresses frustration with the quality of issue reports submitted by users. He emphasizes the importance of clear and accurate descriptions of problems, rather than reworded or overly complicated submissions. Ronacher advocates for a straightforward format that includes the command run, expected outcome, actual outcome, and any relevant error messages.
- ▪Many issue reports lack clarity and are not in the submitter's own voice.
- ▪Reworded submissions often lead to inaccurate conclusions and confusion.
- ▪Ronacher suggests a simple format for issue reporting to improve clarity.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
The most frustrating failure mode right now is that people submit issues that are not in their own voice. They contain an observed problem somewhere, but it has been thrown into a clanker and the clanker reworded it and made a huge mess of it. Typically, it was prompted so badly that the conclusions produced are more often than not inaccurate but always full of confidence. The result is complete guesswork on root causes, fake-minimal repros, suggested implementation strategies, analogies to adjacent but often the wrong code, and long lists of error classes that might or might not matter. [...] So at least personally, I increasingly want issue reports to be condensed to what the human actually observed: I ran this command. I expected this to happen. This happened instead.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Simon Willison.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Simon Willison
