On Thu, Sep 11, 2003 at 01:39:11PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote: > > I think the bugs should have been filed with severity: serious. (...) > > Policy section 3.4.2 says: > > The description field needs to make sense to anyone, even people who > have no idea about any of the things the package deals with. (...) > > Only a sophist would argue that "needs to" doesn't mean "must" or > "required". If your boss says, "Your report needs to be on my desk by > the end of the day," is he just giving you a gentle suggestion, or is he > issuing a mandate. Just for the record, in case anyone is curious, I used 'important' instead of 'serious' because I understood 'needs to = must' from reading the policy. However, I wasn't absolutely sure that was the case. Still, since many developers seem to take offense when sent a bug with above normal severity I'm manually downgrading the bugs to 'normal' after I review them and send the patch (obviously save for bugs which should be closed and where indeed false positives of my faulty metric which I will close directly with my apologies). Regards Javi
Attachment:
pgp1zdTmxGbsk.pgp
Description: PGP signature