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

Re: redefining priorities for 3.0r1


On Monday 23 July 2007 16:25, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Now I like to suggest the following "new" meaning to priorities:
> p1 = we need to fix this immediatly or within the next 5 days
> p2 = we will not release r1 without that fixed
> p3 = we want to fix that before we release r1, but maybe we will not manage
> p4 = we will not fix this for etch, but for lenny
> p5 = we will fix this someday
> Please comment.
> Our definitions for severities are the same as those from bugzilla: :-)
> Blocker:     Blocks development and/or testing work
> Critical:    crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak
> Major:       major loss of function
> Normal:      loss of function
> Minor:       minor loss of function, or other problem with an easy
> workaround Trivial:     cosmetic problem like misspelled words or
> misaligned text Enhancement: Request for enhancement
> I really should put this on on a wikipage later...

I've done so now. Back in july only Petter replied to this mail and was in 
favor of this policy. It's in the wiki at 

And I'm doing so "despite" I hope to release r1 real soon now: First, I won't 
be surprised if we change our plans and do publish a r2, for example if 
http://wiki.debian.org/EtchAndAHalf becomes real. Second, because even if we 
wont have an etch r2, we can use this list for lenny :)


Attachment: pgpekV6XqliSA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: