Re: Bug#3253: Pine base64 bug
Manoj Srivastava <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Guy> Better would be to implement a rating system - critical,
> Guy> important, normal (the default), feature, ...
> Sorry, No. They are orthogonal issues. A feature request is
> not an unimoprtant bug, or a Bug of any other flavour. It is at least
> as distinct from open Bugs as bug reports forwarded upstream
> are. (more so, in fact).
A semantic difference. We can call the entire system a report system
where bugs, feature requests, and anything else are filed.
> Also, I want to have ratings for feature requests -- critical,
> important, normal, frivolous, etc.
Then have more ratings: important-feature, silly-feature, etc. I
don't think it's necessary to have such fine-grained ratings.
> Thirdly, since the forwarded mechanism already exists, and it
> would be easier to incorporate it soon rather than to tweak the whole
> system for ratings.
I don't think it's any harder. Either way you have to add a new field
to the bug database. The entire system, save the html creators, does
use the same routines to read and write the bugs. Parsing the
additional control messages is easy.
I did take a look at the bug system intending to do this over a year
ago, and my opinion is that handling priorities would take about as
much effort as adding feature tagging. Plus it's a more general
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .