Re: [Patch] Remove gccbug from bugreport.texi

[Wolfgang Bangerth <bangerth at ices dot utexas dot edu>]

> > That's why I didn't abandon the gccbug script altogether, but only its 
> > documentation. You are still free to use the script and spread its use by 
> > word of mouth. Is this a compromise you could accept?
> 
> I'm quite unhappy about this: I find this tendency towards web-only bug
> reporting awful in every product and fight it whenever I can. 

I respect your opinion, but nevertheless I can't help to note that this is 
about the same as when people in the mid-1800s said that riding trains is 
not good, against human nature, and altogether unnecessary since one could 
just as well take a horse-drawn coach.

Look at all the incredible ways Daniel twists bugzilla. If we want a new 
field -- whoops, it's there tomorrow. Then think at the headaches he's 
going to have in five years parsing mails that were sent with a script 
that's five years old, in which the fields had different names, in which 
are fields that don't exist at all any more, or in which fields that we 
really require weren't even present. (Absurd? We recently got a bug report 
against 2.7.x. How many years old is that now?)

Now you might say "who needs all these fields, and why do they have to 
change every time?". But that's back to squre one. I myself like trains, 
and am unhappy that I have to take my car every time I go from Austin to 
Houston.

W. (Who's sorry to be sarcastic at times, nimm's nicht persoenlich, so von 
Landsmann zu Landsmann :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wolfgang Bangerth              email:            bangerth@ices.utexas.edu
                               www: http://www.ices.utexas.edu/~bangerth/