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

Re: Bug mass filling

On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 07:21:35 +0200, Andreas Barth <aba@not.so.argh.org> said: 

> * Manoj Srivastava (srivasta@debian.org) [061023 20:14]:
>> Strawman. No one is proosing that; we already have a mechanism for
>> making serious bugs non-RC (etch-ignore tags).

> Etch-ignore tags are usually used for issues where we expect them to
> be RC after etch releases. If we think an issue won't be RC for
> etch+1 etc, then adjusting the severity is correct.

        I would assume violations of policy MUST directives are either
 bugs in policy, which should be fixed, or  an issue in the package
 that needs to be fixed after etch releases.

        If you are aware of issues that are violations of muSt
 directives that are never going to be RC, there should be a bug
 opened on policy with severity important for every one of them.

Any discovery is more likely to be exploited by the wicked than
applied by the virtuous.  -- Marion J. Levy, Jr.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C

Reply to: