This has been bothering me for a while, and sitting on the back of my mind for quite some time. I'd like to discuss this with the rest of the community and my fellow moderators.

There are a few things I dislike about our current system messages regarding question closure for being a bug in Blender. I think we could rephrase them slightly to improve clarity and make it a bit more broad to increase scope.

Currently the close reason reads:

This question appears to be about an issue caused by a bug in Blender. These should be reported to the official bug tracker.

What I dislike about it:

  • Sweeps all bugs under the "Official Blender" umbrella
  • Seems to just push the unwary user directly towards the official bugtracker (despite not doing so)
  • Leaves little margin for doubt
  • Makes no attempt to diagnose it is actually a bug
  • Doesn't account well bugs in addons, or other parts of the environment

I'd like to propose retiring the current one and replacing it with a better one. I'll post a proposal below.


2 Answers 2


I'd like to rephrase it to something along the lines of

This question appears to be about issues caused by a software bug or error. If you confirm this to be the case, consider reporting it to the corresponding author in the appropriate bug tracker.

I think it transmits a bit better the concept that:

  • There are other places to report bugs other than the official bug tracker
  • It may or may not actually be a bug in Blender itself
  • If that is the case, then it should be reported to the corresponding author

let me know if you agree with the rephrasing, or post your own answer if you have better wording for this.

  • $\begingroup$ In short, I agree! (even if it technically means that the question is then closed, isn't it?) $\endgroup$
    – quellenform Mod
    Commented Nov 16, 2023 at 12:59
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, still closed, from the user point of view, but hopefully with a bit clearer directions. I'd really like to also rephrase the post this links to, but I lack the time and energy at the moment. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 16, 2023 at 13:02
  • $\begingroup$ Sounds like a good proposal to me. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 18, 2023 at 12:54
  • $\begingroup$ I think it is important to keep some assertiveness and certainty in the message. Otherwise, you leave a lot of decision-making to users that don't necessarily have the confidence or knowledge to know whether they are indeed concerned by the closing message and what to do about it. $\endgroup$
    – Lauloque Mod
    Commented Nov 19, 2023 at 16:38
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertGützkow Could you look at my comments in the other answer? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 9:34
  • $\begingroup$ @quellenform Should we link directly to the official tracker, or our own guide first? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 9:35
  • $\begingroup$ @DuarteFarrajotaRamos To have better control over the content, I would say to refer to our own guide first. ...Who knows what awaits us in the future. $\endgroup$
    – quellenform Mod
    Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 11:57
  • $\begingroup$ Agree, I was veering more towards that option as well. That makes sense to me. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 15:15
  • $\begingroup$ @RobertGützkow I've submitted a draft for your review at blender.stackexchange.com/admin/flags/… $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 11:11
  • $\begingroup$ @quellenform Could you guys take a look when you get a chance? Feel free to edit whatever you feel needs improvements $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 11:12
  • $\begingroup$ @DuarteFarrajotaRamos Thank you for editing this item! It looks good to me. Do I need to set any action or can you put this online? $\endgroup$
    – quellenform Mod
    Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 12:58
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks Quellenform. I think you have to approve the revision at the link above. There should be an Approve button to the right on he Actions column. Mine is greyed out because I'm the author, but yours should be clickable $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 13:17
  • $\begingroup$ @DuarteFarrajotaRamos The approve button is also greyed out for me. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 19:04
  • $\begingroup$ Strange. @RobertGützkow Could you check now? $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 23:24
  • $\begingroup$ @quellenform It may have been cause by having reached the site limit for custom close messages $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 4, 2023 at 23:24

After these two topics, I also thought there is something wrong. Addons are mixed in, there isn't much help being done, ... Posters are kinda left alone with a door slammed at their nose.
I was thinking perhaps we should have two different messages for whether it's a Blender bug or a third party addon / software bug?

That being said, I think Blender's bug message is actually fine ; it's when we use it too broadly that it becomes clunky. Namely, when we use it for a non-blender bug or when we are not even sure it's a bug. I think that's when there is an issue.

Hence, a new message that is formulated for both Blender and non-Blender bugs, and links to the official bug report documentation instead of our current BSE link. As that official documentation really does a great job of explaining everything, what is actually a bug, how to report bugs for Blender or addons, which data to include and how, ...

This question appears to be about an issue caused by Blender, or a third-party software or addon. These should be reported to their respective bug tracker. Please look at the following page to learn how to do so:
Process/Bug Reports - Blender Developer Wiki

And ideally, we as good Blender citizens could take the time to comment the link to the actual bug reporting place if it's a third party.

  • $\begingroup$ While I agree with most of what you said, unfortunately Stack Exchange imposes only three custom close reasons for sites, beyond the network wide ones. We already have "Too Localized", About Hardware" and "Bug Report", so sadly we've have to do away with one of those to introduce a new one which doesn't seem reasonable. I do like the idea of linking to the official bug report guidelines, but given the broader scope of the close for both official and third party bugs, we'd have to do so carefully. Could you suggest a proposal with this in mind? $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 17, 2023 at 22:44
  • $\begingroup$ Just updated, let me know how it goes. $\endgroup$
    – Lauloque Mod
    Commented Nov 19, 2023 at 16:35
  • $\begingroup$ Structure wise seems mostly fine, I'd do some minor adjustments but that's it. I'm unsure about linking directly to the wiki, it may unintentionally encourage third party bugs to be incorrectly reported to the official bug tracker. I'd like to hear what the other mods have to say. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 9:34
  • $\begingroup$ The documentation specifically mentions that addons bugs must be reported using the addon's own Report A Bug button, so unless a specific addon is made without it, there shouldn't be any issue here. If we think things needs to be made clearer, we can always propose a change ;) $\endgroup$
    – Lauloque Mod
    Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 15:48
  • $\begingroup$ I asked the other mods about this. So far Quellenform commented on my answer below, and also prefers linking to our guide first, which gives us more control. From there we can link to the official guide. Maybe Robert has a different say. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 15:53
  • $\begingroup$ @DuarteFarrajotaRamos Either approach is fine by me. The benefit of linking our own page is that we can provide additional information not included in Blender's wiki. The benefit of Blender's wiki is that it is the official source on how to report bugs. $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 20, 2023 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ I've submitted an initial draft for review. Feel free to improve in any way you can $\endgroup$ Commented Nov 22, 2023 at 20:27

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .