Re: Redefining critical bug severity (was: how to deal with a missed so bump already uploaded ?)

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Matthias Urlichs writes ("Re: Redefining critical bug severity (was: how to deal with a missed so bump already uploaded ?)"):
> Ian Jackson:
> > Would adding "totally" (or "utterly") before "unrelated" help perhaps ?
> 
> Or simply add a footnote stating that two packages are NOT unrelated
> if one depends on the other.

That might help.  I do wonder if what's happening is just that people
are glancing over the text without properly reading it, and reading
"unrelated" as if it said something like "other".  If so then adding a
footnote won't help.  People often won't read a footnote unless they
are tripped up by something in the main text.

That's why I suggested adding a strengthening word.  That might draw
the reader's attention to the word "unrelated" (by giving it greater
apparently significance in the text).

It seems to me that someone who actually applies their attention to
the question would rarely conclude that an rdep was "totally
unrelated" or "utterly unrelated".  Even thinking that it's
"unrelated" is a stretch.  We just need to improve the human-factors
of the page to try to direct the careless reader's attention to this
point.

(And I don't mean to impugn the careless reader.  Life is too short,
and the world too full of words, to read everything very carefully.)

Ian.