Re: A thought on urgency
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:
Joey> Andrew McMillan wrote:
>> I really like the serial number approach Jason proposed first. What
>> about making it explicitly specify what the previous version priority
>> was (or what the increment is over that) along with the serial number?
>>
>> Would that provide for the human-interpretiveness that you want?
Joey> I guess I could live with that. Urgency: high (120)
I dunno. I would naturally assume that refered to the urgency
_level_, rather than a serial number. Given a number, I would
naturally want to use it to compare the urgency levels across
packages (and I would like to say upgrade packages only for security
fixes -- and I have no idea how to relate it to these numbers) I much
prefer the variant that looks through the changelog and determines
upgrade desireability.
manoj
--
"Every institution I've ever been associated with has tried to screw
me." Stephen Wolfram
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
Reply to: