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

Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

Steve Langasek wrote:
> > Considered that ftbfs bugs for scc architectures are not going to be
> > RC any more,
> Right, they'll be important instead of serious, the traditional severity
> for FTBFS on non-RC archs

Somewhere else in this vast thread, someone suggested that they be
serious and etch-ignore instead. Or perhaps serious bugs that are only
tagged with a SCC arch should be automatically treated as etch-ignore.

This actually seems to make more sense, since they could become RC for
etch if we change out minds and add an arch to the set of release
arches. Or they might need to become RC after etch if the set of release
arches changes then.

Any thoughts on this from the BTS admins / RMs?

see shy jo

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: