Re: wterm in potato
On Sat, Feb 19, 2000 at 02:51:32PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
> > > nor does the fact that wterm is not 8-bit clean qualify as an "important"
> > > bug:
> > Geez, and I thought not being 8-bit clean was something we would never
> > encounter again, not to mention have to prove again that it matters...
> > silly me >:(
> Did I say it didn't matter? No, I didn't. Did I say the bug should be
> closed or ignored? No, I didn't. I simply said that it doesn't fit the
> definition of "important" (in the BTS severity-level sense).
Well, if the bug prevents anyone speaking Russian (how many thousands of our
users is that?) from using wterm, then I think it fits the description of
"any other bug which makes the package unsuitable for release."
Besides, to intentionally not have a bug fixed in the stable release can be
called ignoring it.
> > > presumably many others do find it usable.
> > If everyone thought that way, we would have some 250 release-critical bugs
> > less today :>
> And if everybody rated their "favorite" bug as important or grave,
> we'd have 500 or a 1000 more. What's your point?
Perhaps my point is that the release manager has the final say on whether a
bug is RC or not. He obviously decided it was RC enough to warrant removal
of wterm from frozen. (until it gets fixed)
> I was talking about a specific case.
And in this specific case, bug can be fixed quite easily. So there is no
reason to downgrade a bug's severity, yet a lot of you US-ASCII (or
whatever) users want to do it, instead of simply fixing the package.
enJoy -*/\*- don't even try to pronounce my first name