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

Re: On Bugs

On Tue, Oct 03, 2000 at 04:10:34AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 02, 2000 at 10:55:56AM -0700, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> >my point is, I am not against console-apt being released in Debian.  However I
> >want a bug severity high enough that the maintainer takes the bug seriously.
> Why would anyone not take a "normal" severity bug seriously?

You have 158 outstanding bugs according to the BTS, a large number of
them at normal severity. Are you simply not taking them seriously? OTOH,
can a casual observer tell which of those normal bugs is truely
important (in the normal sense of the word, not in the obscure
policy-based sense) and which are not?

Perhaps the larger problem here is that our bts doesn't recognize
degrees of severity. Not all bugs that are "normal" in a policy sense
are of equal severity. It would be nice if there were a mechanism for
rating the impact of a bug. What you're proposing makes a lie out of the
term "severity". If "important" bugs are those with major policy
violations then they should really be "Class: policy , Severity:
critical" or some such. 

Mike Stone

Reply to: