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

Re: Incomplete build depends on binary-all packages



On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 01:28:54PM -0500, Mark Eichin wrote:
> I certainly find it useful when a bug is clearly labeled as "see
> policy ##.##" because then I can see exactly how to fix it, and
> there's no concern of it being a matter of taste, or likely even
> debugging... 

<blowing own horn>

Also known as the "Justification:" header.  This is something I came up
with when I wrote a patch for reportbug to force people to explain why
they think their bug should have a severity higher than important[1].
Some people have this tendency to file bugs about the most insignificant
little things in the X server, and mark them CRITICAL because this
reflects their *personal annoyance level*.  Well, okay.  The violence
with which I rip your internal organs from your body will reflect my
personal annoyance level, too.

I think reportbug has ratcheted down its sadism a few notches from what
I originally pitched (if you failed to supply an appropriate
justification, it would silently jack the severity down to normal and
pretend like everything was okay), but the idea seems to have caught on
outside that tool.  James Troup often files won't-build bugs using this
header even though he doesn't appear to be using reportbug.

Of course, now that I'm claiming credit for this thing which he seems to
think is a good idea, he'll probably stop.  Oh well.  ;-)

</blowing own horn>

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=110476&archive=yes&repeatmerged=yes

-- 
G. Branden Robinson                |      It doesn't matter what you are
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      doing, emacs is always overkill.
branden@debian.org                 |      -- Stephen J. Carpenter
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |

Attachment: pgpJ0gO1N3KgK.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: