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

Re: Bug#455769: same problem on wheezy + Thinkpad X220T

On 03/29/2013 01:48 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> Thomas, you have put a lot of great work into the XCP packages and I'm
> glad I've tried them.  I've also provided diagnostic information,
> patches and workarounds for those issues that I felt to be RC, so that
> the users can have the best possible experience of your packages.

And I am very happy you did. Thanks for it. Really !!!
Though this has absolutely nothing to do with what I am
talking about (eg: the severity of bugs).

> As you can see from the contributions on the XCP bugs (where I've
> provided workarounds and patches and filled gaps in the documentation),
> the issues don't stop me using the packages at all.

Then it doesn't deserve a severity "grave" (makes the package
in question unusable by most or all users), "serious" (a severe
violation of Debian policy) or "critical" (makes unrelated software
on the system break). Please stick to the definitions.

By the way, for that annoying /24 pif-reconfigure-ip thing, I've
got the fix from upstream, and asked the release team if I can
upload the fix. I also modified the README.Debian as suggested.
I have good hope that this will be accepted by the release team
before Wheezy, though if it can't, I'm fine with it going through
proposed-updates later on. Please respect the release team
decisions, they are motivated by ... releasing! :)
> I'm just thinking
> about how other users will feel, particularly if they don't have the
> same capacity (or time) to investigate and resolve such issues.
That is very nice, though trying to force the wrong severity of
a bug will *not* help. What helps is fixing the issue, providing
a workaround, or some documentation (which you did...).



Reply to: