Re: When is it acceptable to set Urgency: high on upload?
On Mon, 15 Mar 2004, Number Six wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2004 at 08:25:16AM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > 1. Is it important enough to require higher priority on auto-builders,
> > and to go through the testing scripts faster? If so, set it to
> > medium or high.
> > 2. Is it imperative that an upload be installed everywhere by tomorrow?
> > (usually, for remote-root-roles and unrelated-data-loss bugs). If so,
> > set it to "emergency".
> The last time this came up I was under the impression the response was
> if it fixes a security hole, it's High. For everything else, it's Low.
> And no use case for Medium was presented, and this fact was commented
> Am I mis-remembering this?
<shrugs> I don't recall.
I can describe what *I* do, though: all my security updates go as "high",
all important (for the end user) bug fixes as "medium". I have used
"emergency" only once, I don't even remember when (it was a quite serious
Even with such a broad criteria, about 80% of my uploads are of low urgency,
(since I don't do an upload for every trivial bug I fix. If I did, about
99% would be low priority ;-) ).
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot