[plt-scheme] planet: help submitting bugs & a question

Oh -- let me clarify a little more -- the way this information would
be collected is via the default exception handler (called when no
exception handler is in place) and the one that records information
would probably only be installed when running inside drscheme. That's
how the 'end user' would not see this.

Of course, we don't have to do it that way -- that's just what I had
in mind when I wrote that.

Robby

On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Robby Findler <robby at cs.uchicago.edu> wrote:
> I was thinking of an "end user" as someone who uses some complete
> software application (that possibly involves planet packages). Such a
> person is not typically running inside drscheme and they won't see the
> blue icon.
>
> Robby
>
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 11:13 AM, Carl Eastlund <cce at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>> In that case, your answer to me is clear, but now I don't understand
>> your answer to Grant.  In what way did not mean "not an end user"?
>>
>> --Carl
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Robby Findler <robby at cs.uchicago.edu> wrote:
>>> I can see how what I wrote was perhaps unclear. I meant the person
>>> whose machine actually has the contract violation. Carl also seems to
>>> mean that. Clear now?
>>>
>>> Robby
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 9:23 AM, Felix Klock's PLT scheme proxy
>>> <pltscheme at pnkfx.org> wrote:
>>>> Robby: "I meant the user of the planet package (a programmer), not an end
>>>> user of the software."
>>>>
>>>> Carl: "it is the end user who matters ... Any time a program crashes in
>>>> Windows or Mac OS, I get asked if I want to send the bug report to Microsoft
>>>> or Apple respectively, and it's not like the OS knows I'm a programmer"
>>>>
>>>> Robby: "Are we not all saying the same thing?"
>>>>
>>>> I think you two definitely are *not* saying the same thing.  (All of the
>>>> above quotes appear in context below.)
>>>>
>>>> -Felix, (who agrees with Carl, for the record)
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 2, 2008, at 10:17 AM, Robby Findler wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, yes. All along: the person who gets the error message gets to
>>>>> decide to submit it. Are we not all saying the same thing?
>>>>>
>>>>> Robby
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Carl Eastlund <cce at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Robby Findler <robby at cs.uchicago.edu>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2008 at 8:58 AM, Grant Rettke <grettke at acm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> How would a user know what they should and they should not send when a
>>>>>>>> contract is violated? It would be confusing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sorry -- we seem to be miscommunicating.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> When I wrote "user" I meant the user of the planet package (a
>>>>>>> programmer), not an end user of the software.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Wait... I think it is the end user who matters.  If Albert writes an
>>>>>> encryption routine, and Bob uses it to write an online store, and Curt
>>>>>> tries to buy something and it hits a bug, we should ask Curt if he
>>>>>> wants to send the error report so he can say "no, don't send any data,
>>>>>> I just typed my credit card number in".  We don't want to send Curt's
>>>>>> credit information to Bob and ask him if Al can have it; Bob shouldn't
>>>>>> have it to begin with.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Curt doesn't have to know any technical details, he just needs to know
>>>>>> whether or not the application involved had any private data.  Any
>>>>>> time a program crashes in Windows or Mac OS, I get asked if I want to
>>>>>> send the bug report to Microsoft or Apple respectively, and it's not
>>>>>> like the OS knows I'm a programmer.  The same principle applies to
>>>>>> Planet and PLT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Carl
>>
>>
>