Re: On Bugs
On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 07:51:19AM +0100, John Lines wrote:
> > > I think the cause of such inflated severities (and occassionally
> > > deflated severities: a number of important bugs actually should
> > > be grave or critical, or at least that was the case during the freeze)
> > > is the extremely poor definition of important, namely:
> > >
> > > important any other bug which makes the package unsuitable for release.
> > >
> > > (from reportbug)
> Perhaps reportbug should do ask - 'Shall I remove this package from your
> when a user files a bug of important or higher. If they say no, then downgrade
That's fine unless the bug is a packaging bug, because if the new package
fails in preinst/postinst/etc, the user will definitely not want the old
(working) version of the package removed.
Adam McKenna <email@example.com> | "No matter how much it changes,
http://flounder.net/publickey.html | technology's just a bunch of wires
GPG: 17A4 11F7 5E7E C2E7 08AA | connected to a bunch of other wires."
38B0 05D0 8BF7 2C6D 110A | Joe Rogan, _NewsRadio_
2:55am up 118 days, 10 min, 9 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00