From dmb at mrc-dunn.cam.ac.uk  Fri Nov  5 13:32:39 2004
From: dmb at mrc-dunn.cam.ac.uk (Dan Bolser)
Date: Fri Nov  5 13:32:53 2004
Subject: [Rd] Bug report (PR#7341)
In-Reply-To: <16779.25826.488530.297612@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0411051226200.10126-100000@mail.mrc-dunn.cam.ac.uk>

On Fri, 5 Nov 2004, Martin Maechler wrote:

>>>>>> "dan" == dan  <dan@bolser.co.uk>
>>>>>>     on Thu,  4 Nov 2004 19:08:08 +0100 (CET) writes:
>
>    dan> Full_Name: Dan B Version: na OS: na Submission from:
>    dan> (NULL) (80.6.127.185)
>
>
>    dan> I can't log into the bug tracker (I can't find where to
>    dan> register / login).
>
>[that's not what you should do. 

OK, I just wanted to post a 'follow up' to the original 'bug'.


> Have you read on this in the FAQ or  help(bug.report) ?
> Please, please, do.
>]

Sorry. This is probably the cause of all the problems.

I know this isn't a 'bug' in the strict sense, but nither are the
'wishlist' entries on the bugs pages. I thought a bug report was a good
place to log these requests, so that they didn't get 'dropped' in the
system (i.e. "I thought you were catching that" - "Oh I thought *you* were
catching that") 

The bug report could be debated / altered as any bug is.

What classifies as a 'documentation bug'? A piece of documentation that
crashes my OS? (or my brain? ;)

Anyway, I know better now.

Thanks very much for the information,
All the best,
Dan.


>
>    dan> In this way I can't add the following context diff
>    dan> (hopefully in the right order) for my changes to the
>    dan> matrix.Rd...
>
>    dan> Hmm... I guess this should be a separate report
>    dan> anyway...
>
>No, this is really not a bug report __AT ALL__
>
>You had all this long discussion about how the documentation 
>can/could/should/{is_hard_to} be improved  and end up sending
>a *bug report* ?
>Really!
>
>Whereas I value your contribution for improving the matrix help
>page -- and I do think both changes are worthwhile ---
>there is no bug, and hence a bug report is *WRONG*!
>
>Sending this to R-devel [instead! - not automagically via the
>bug report] would have been perfectly fine and helpful...
>
>    dan> The first diff explains how the dimnames list should
>    dan> work, and the second diff gives an example of using the
>    dan> dimnames list. (no equivelent example exists, and where
>    dan> better than the matrix man page to show this off).
>
>agreed.
>
>I'll put in a version of your proposed improvement,
>but please do try more to understand what's appropriate for bug
>reports.
>
>Regards,
>Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich
>


[Rd] Bug report (PR#7341)
Dan Bolser