[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for July 30, 1999

I'm replying to this because Joseph expresses a common misconception.

Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 30, 1999 at 12:15:07AM -0500, BugScan reporter wrote:
> > Package: epic4-script-splitfire (main)
> > Maintainer: Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>
> >   41920  EVIL EVIL on publics
> While the bug is important (because what the script does is something it
> really should not be doing), it should not be considered release critical.

I'm beginning to think the name "important" was a bad idea.  The sole
difference between "important" and "normal" bugs is that the former
are release-critical.  If the bug is not release-critical, it should
not be severity "important".

If the script does something it really should not be doing, then that
is indeed a bug.  We have a bug-tracking system for that!  "normal"
severity does not mean "unimportant".  The two are not opposites.

> It will be downgraded if neccessary, but I've got it flagged important so
> I am reminded to harass the upstream maintainer about a fix now and then.
> =>

This sounds like a normal, forwarded bug.

If it is not your opinion that this bug makes the package unsuitable for
release, then please set it to normal severity.

Richard Braakman

Reply to: