Re: How to determine the urgency of an upload

[Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>]

joshk@triplehelix.org (Joshua Kwan) writes:

> On Mon, Jan 12, 2004 at 05:19:50PM +0100, Tobias Toedter wrote:
> > I think it's clear to set the urgency to low for almost every purpose -- 
> > except for security updates, I guess that should be urgency=high.
> > 
> > But what about urgency=medium? Are there any guidelines or is it entirely up 
> > to the maintainer of a package to set the urgency to this level?
> 
> Urgency denotes how long it should take for the package to trickle to
> testing. So if a particularly outdated version is in sarge, and you have
> just uploaded a version whose functionality you are confident of, upload

If sarge is so outdated there are a lot of changes to the new upload,
so a lot of possible bugs. The older sarge is the lower the urgency
should be in my opinion.

> it with urgency medium or high so it gets into testing within 5 or 2
> days respectively. Same reasoning if you have just fixed a particularly
> nasty bug.
> 
> Of course, urgency != low should be used sparingly to allow the unstable
> users to test the new packages and to not throw off the whole transition-
> to-sarge system.

Personally I feel most comfortable with:

high: security update
medium: RC bugs (especially adding a Build-Depends and similar trivial fixes)
low: everything else

But thats just me.

Most of the time with non trivial Build-Depends chains you have to
wait for the slower archs to compile the package longer than the "low"
or "medium" period anyway. Currently I don't think you can get a
package autobuild within 2 days at all.

MfG
        Goswin