What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 150 Stack Exchange communities.

In my question Richfaces portlet | FacesContext not found I tried my best to explain the problem I was having. I provided maximum details like steps I performed and stack trace of the exception I was getting and believe that my question has a specific and authoritative answer. Then why it was closed?

share|improve this question

closed as too localized by casperOne Jul 5 '12 at 4:39

This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

"Can anybody point out what am I doing wrong here ? Any help, hints, pointers are appreciated." - that's slightly vague but the rest of the post makes up for it. It's really the stack trace. Isolate that down to the pertinent parts (don't just dump a stack trace like that on the site) and we can reopen it. – casperOne Jul 5 '12 at 4:28
@casperOne Heh. Beat you to it... I don't think a stack trace can be cut down if one doesn't know where the problem is in the first place. – Adam Lear Jul 5 '12 at 4:28
@AnnaLear I think that it's possible to whittle it down. If more of it is needed people will let the poster know. Just dumping stack traces most of the time is lazy and inefficient when the pertinent information is in the top 10 lines or so. – casperOne Jul 5 '12 at 4:31
@casperOne In principle, sure. In the context of this specific question... I think it's at least worth not being closed. A NARQ would usually be someone dumping a stack trace (or a giant code block) with a short "halp me fix my codez" type sentence. This question is a lot more clear than that and not deserving of a NARQ label, IMHO. If the stack trace is the wrong way to go, this can be resolved through edits/comments. Or it can remain unanswered if the requested clarifications are truly necessary and not provided. – Adam Lear Jul 5 '12 at 4:33

1 Answer 1

up vote 3 down vote accepted

I agree with you. Normally a large amount of code would be discouraged, but a stack trace is a stack trace. I don't see how you could cut it down without possibly losing important information that'd lead to an answer to your question.

I reopened the question.

I see there's also a request for a code sample instead of a stack trace in the comments. That might be a better way to go, but either way I don't think it's worth closing the question over it.

share|improve this answer
Remember that close reasons are there to help the user improve a post if there's not enough for a real question. As you said there's a request for code meaning that an incomplete picture has been given, hence NARQ. Closure is what is done in this case to inform the user more work needs to go into the question. – casperOne Jul 5 '12 at 4:33
@casperOne I'm aware of what the close reasons are supposed to do. But, this is a clear question with steps to repro and a comment asking for clarification. Hardly worth closing in my opinion, though clearly we disagree on that. I'd probably even let it stand if it was missing the stack trace but otherwise looked the same. (Edit: not a comment asking for clarification, but just a comment with formatting advice and a suggestion for a solution. Misread the first sentence in it.) – Adam Lear Jul 5 '12 at 4:35
Thanks Anna. Actually it is not a request for code. I pasted my stacktrace in quotes rather then in code block at first. He is telling me to write stacktrace in code block. – Umer Hayat Jul 5 '12 at 4:35
@UmerHayat Oh yeah, you're right. My mistake, I misread that comment. – Adam Lear Jul 5 '12 at 4:36

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