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

Re: XFree86 4.3.0 and testing (was: when will the release release)

On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 05:06:21PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 06:39:47AM -0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 27, 2004 at 02:18:03PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 26, 2004 at 11:42:30PM -0800, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > >...
> > > > Kamion said the only thing holding it up yesterday was an RC bug, which
> > > > I promptly downgraded; if it didn't go in today, I expect that will be
> > > > because of the new sppc upload, making it a transitive problem.
> > > 
> > > Please don't forget to upgrade the bug again later.
> > > 
> > > Downgrading RC bugs for getting a package into testing sometimes has the 
> > > effect that the then non-RC bug gets forgotten later [1].
> > 
> > I downgraded it because it is NOT A VALID RC BUG IN THE FIRST PLACE.
> I'd say a bug in a library that causes segfaults in programs is a good 
> candidate for being RC.

'important'. It only triggers in a relatively rare situation; virtually
everyone else using the package is fine with it.

> I know that XFree86 with nearly 200 important bugs has other rules for
> RC bugs than the rest of Debian, and it's a different question what to
> do with such bugs if they are hard to fix, but at a first glance the bug
> in question that includes both an analysis of the problem and a patch
> seems to be an example of a perfect bug report.

No, it does not. It just so happens to be so friggin' huge that very few
problems have such an adverse impact as to make the entire library
useless. Once I catch one, I'll let it through.

Daniel Stone                                                <daniels@debian.org>
Debian: the universal operating system                     http://www.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: