On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 09:44:25PM +1100, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 05, 2000 at 04:37:10AM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Errr. A grave bug could be due to, say, a /tmp race that lets any random
> > user on a student.cs.some-u.edu randomly trash any other student's thesis
> > work. Or it could randomly trash your entire home directory when run
> > with --help as its only argument. Leave it in unstable, maybe, but not
> > in stable.
> OK, well perhaps there's no hard and fast rule. Or perhaps a 'grave'
> bug on an 'extra' package is release critical, but an
> 'important' bug on an 'extra' package is not.
An important bug is something like "non-free package in main", or "package
has no copyright file, we probably can't distribute it", or so forth.
"important, grave, and critical bugs must be fixed before a package will be
included in the release" seems a pretty decent hard and fast rule to me.
Except when we get bugs that, while important, don't match the definitions
of grave or critical or violate policy.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``We reject: kings, presidents, and voting.
We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
-- Dave Clark
Attachment:
pgpHbLDjyxlR_.pgp
Description: PGP signature