Re: A way _not_ to handle bugs
Adrian Bunk wrote:
>grave <-> serious isn't worth a discussion since there's not a big
>difference between them (both are RC)
You are 100% wrong here. Why do we have bug severities then? Severities
are there to inform the developer and the rest of the Debian world about
the seriousness of the bug. I tend to stay away from packages that have
grave or critical bugs against them before I read the bug report. So,
let me refresh your mind about bug severities,
|critical - |makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole
system) break, or causes serious data loss, or introduces a security
hole on systems where you install the package.
|grave - |makes the package in question unusable or mostly so, or causes
data loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to the accounts
of users who use the package.
|serious - |is a severe violation of Debian policy
<http://release.debian.org/sarge_rc_policy.txt> (roughly, it violates a
"must" or "required" directive), or, in the package maintainer's
opinion, makes the package unsuitable for release.
|important - |a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a
package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone.
|normal - |the default value, applicable to most bugs.
|minor - |a problem which doesn't affect the package's usefulness, and
is presumably trivial to fix.
|wishlist - |for any feature request, and also for any bugs that are
very difficult to fix due to major design considerations.
Thus, a bug that makes the package break like this falls under the
important category (since an easy work around is available). *But*, the
bug is also a violation of the Debian policy (ie. depends), so it
Grave bugs are only there if the package doesn't work at all when you
upgraded ALL depends to latest versions.