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

Re: A thought on urgency

>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> writes:

 Joey> Andrew McMillan wrote:
 >> I really like the serial number approach Jason proposed first.  What
 >> about making it explicitly specify what the previous version priority
 >> was (or what the increment is over that) along with the serial number?
 >> Would that provide for the human-interpretiveness that you want?

 Joey> I guess I could live with that. Urgency: high (120)

	I dunno. I would naturally assume that refered to the urgency
 _level_, rather than a serial number. Given a number, I would
 naturally want to use it to compare the urgency levels across
 packages (and I would like to say upgrade packages only for security
 fixes -- and I have no idea how to relate it to these numbers) I much
 prefer the variant that looks through the changelog and determines
 upgrade desireability.

 "Every institution I've ever been associated with has tried to screw
 me." Stephen Wolfram
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: