Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 15, 2022. It is now read-only.

Improve diagnostics for package initialization errors #317

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 5, 2018

Conversation

jasonrudolph
Copy link
Contributor

@jasonrudolph jasonrudolph commented Feb 5, 2018

To aid in diagnosing and debugging package initialization errors (#266), this pull request incorporates the changes from atom/teletype-client#50 to provide a pre-filled GitHub Issue body with useful diagnostic information.

For example, clicking on the atom/teletype link in the popover...

screen shot 2018-02-05 at 10 47 28 am

...will prefill an issue like this:

screen shot 2018-02-05 at 10 47 08 am

Verification Process

  • Simulate a failed request by turning off wi-fi
  • Simulate a failed response by hacking the local teletype-server to return a non-JSON response
  • Ensure that pointing to the production server still allows successful collaboration in a portal

馃崘'd with @as-cii

jasonrudolph and others added 3 commits February 3, 2018 07:17
Co-authored-by: Antonio Scandurra <as-cii@github.com>
Co-authored-by: Antonio Scandurra <as-cii@github.com>
@jasonrudolph jasonrudolph merged commit d069864 into master Feb 5, 2018
@jasonrudolph jasonrudolph deleted the improve-diagnostics-for-http-request-errors branch February 5, 2018 15:59
@50Wliu
Copy link
Contributor

50Wliu commented Feb 5, 2018

Wording suggestion: visit atom/teletype and open an issue sounds to me like I have to click the link, and then create an issue by myself. However, what's really happening now is that link creates the issue contents for me and all I have to do is press the big green button. So my suggestion is to incorporate that aspect into the text, like If the problem persists, please [open an issue](link_goes_here) (which I think still doesn't convey the fact that you'll have an issue prefilled for you, but I can't think of anything better).

馃挱?

@jasonrudolph
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wording suggestion

@50Wliu: Thanks for caring about this and thanks for the suggestion. If you're interested in opening a pull request to update the wording, I'll happily review it for you.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants