Bug#252928: Why did you lower the severity of #252928?
Adrian Bunk writes:
> On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:29:07PM +0200, Dominique Devriese wrote:
>> ... Clearly, the highest severity that this bug can arguably
>> qualify for is "serious" if and only if Chris Cheney thinks so, and
>> important otherwise. Chris has clearly shown that he did not at
>> the time think so, so I am downgrading this bug to important. It's
>> up to him to change it to serious if he thinks it deserves that. I
>> hope we can now stop playing pingpong with the severity ?
> As said in the part of the mail you skipped: Your RM reopened a
> similar (grave) bug I sent that covered a similar issue.
> Chris uploaded a new version of kdelibs 6 days after my bug report.
> Why did he downgrade it instead of simply fixing the issue via a
> conflict?
Probably because
1 adding a conflict to a package because of a bug in another package
is generally the wrong thing to do, even if it may be good as a
workaround in this case
2 you did not provide a lot of explanation about why it was the
correct thing to do in this case
>> > In the sense "must be fixed, before the new kdelibs enters
>> > testing, or apollon in testing will be broken".
>>
>> The only thing that's keeping the new apollon ( which, according to
>> its changelog has the real fix for the problem ) from entering
>> testing is its dependency on kdelibs. Thus, there is little chance
>> that the new kdelibs would enter sarge and the new apollon
>> wouldn't. ...
> Imagine a new upload of apollon to unstable, a RC bug in apollon, or
> many other reasons like apollon not being built on one architecture.
Of course, but you have to agree that it won't take ages to fix
something like this in a simple package like apollon. This is where
the difference is with the wine bug you were talking about.
By the way, why do you seem to think that an uninstallable version of
apollon in sarge is better than a version that crashes on startup ?
cheers
domi
Reply to: