Bug#91276: PROPOSED 2001/03/25] update policy to match new serious severity

[Julian Gilbey <J.D.Gilbey@qmw.ac.uk>]

On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 09:34:01PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at 11:30:08AM +0100, Julian Gilbey wrote:
> > > --- policy.sgml.old     Sun Mar 25 22:33:31 2001
> > > +++ policy.sgml Sun Mar 25 22:33:52 2001
> > > @@ -181,7 +181,7 @@
> > >         </p>
> > >         <p>
> > >           These classifications are roughly equivalent to the bug
>                                         ^^^^^^^
> > > -         severities <em>important</em> (for <em>must</em> or
> > > +         severities <em>serious</em> (for <em>must</em> or
> > >           <em>required</em> directive violations), <em>normal</em>
> > >           (for <em>should</em> or <em>recommended</em> directive
> > >           violations) and <em>wishlist</em> (for <em>optional</em>
> > What about important severity?  I would suggest the following:
> 
> *shrug* Does it matter? I'm not worried either way.

Not much, but if we're changing it already, we may as well get it
roughly right.

   Julian

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

         Julian Gilbey, Dept of Maths, Queen Mary, Univ. of London
       Debian GNU/Linux Developer,  see http://people.debian.org/~jdg
  Donate free food to the world's hungry: see http://www.thehungersite.com/