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

Re: redefining priorities for 3.0r1



Hi,

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 
http://wiki.debian.org/DebianEdu/HowTo/BugPriority+Severity

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 :)


regards,
	Holger

Attachment: pgpekV6XqliSA.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: