Re: Hurd critical bugs

[Grant Bowman <grantbow@grantbow.com>]

* Marcus Brinkmann <marcus@gnu.org> [020430 13:34]:
> Ok, just wanted to be sure it is not something that is easy to fix.
> I will check if the critical severity is really justified in this case,
> maybe Mark was not using it as Debian expects it to be used.

I was recently reading through the Debian Policy document.  You all may
already know this, but for reference here's an excerpt from Section 1.
How they apply to the ports are probably left to the porting effort's
discretion.  I hope this helps.

-- 
-- Grant Bowman                                <grantbow@grantbow.com>


     In this manual, the words _must_, _should_ and _may_, and the
     adjectives _required_, _recommended_ and _optional_, are used to
     distinguish the significance of the various guidelines in this policy
     document.  Packages that do not conform to the guidelines denoted by
     _must_ (or _required_) will generally not be considered acceptable for
     the Debian distribution.  Non-conformance with guidelines denoted by
     _should_ (or _recommended_) will generally be considered a bug, but
     will not necessarily render a package unsuitable for distribution.
     Guidelines denoted by _may_ (or _optional_) are truly optional and
     adherence is left to the maintainer's discretion.

     These classifications are roughly equivalent to the bug severities
     _serious_ (for _must_ or _required_ directive violations), _minor_,
     _normal_ or _important_ (for _should_ or _recommended_ directive
     violations) and _wishlist_ (for _optional_ items).[2]



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-hurd-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org