Re: : Re: Release-critical Bugreport for April 28, 2000
On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 08:13:11AM -0700, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
> >On Fri, Apr 28, 2000 at 11:56:35AM +0200, Peter
> >Makholm wrote:
> >> I didn't pick random packages. I picked some
> >>packages that is
> >> useless in their present state (thats what release
> >>critical bug
> >> means). If the above packages isn't useless their
> >>bugs shouldn't have
> >> a release critical serverity.
>
> >I don't think any of the release critical severity
> >levels
> >(important, grave, critical) says that such bugs must
> >make a packge
> >universally useless. Many of these packages will work
> >for most
> >people but fail in a few corner cases.
>
> Then don't shit can the package BUT DO list all the
> know bugs and how they affect the use of the package
> in release notes for the package. (or in the package
> description). Then users can decide if they want to
> install the package.
I agree, a bug on a package should be of a severity that relates to the
package, not the distribution as a whole. Else, we will get bugs that are
pretty much the same for two seperate packages, yet because one package is
in base, and the other is prio extra, they get set at different
severities.
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: