On Tue, May 28, 2002 at 07:54:14PM +1000, Matthew Palmer wrote: > But a bug marked 'potato' but that won't be fixed because it's not security > critical - is that still a bug? I mean, it is an issue with the package, > but because it only affects potato (or, by extension, the stable > distribution, whatever it may be) it's never going to get fixed, so what is > to be done with the bug? Do we just leave them open forever, or should they > be marked somehow? I think that tagging them somehow is the way to go - the > Potato tag could serve that role, I guess, but that tag also flags bugs > which may be security or RC. No, tagging the bug 'potato' only means that it's a bug that pertains specifically to potato. There are NO RC bugs that are potato-specific, because potato is already released. ;) And for security-related bugs, there are other BTS tags. For my part, I've been tagging such potato-specific bugs as 'potato' and leaving them open, with the expectation that once woody is released we can have a mass closing of all such bugs. (With champagne, etc.) Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgp0ZnZsRcbKC.pgp
Description: PGP signature