Re: The Serious severity
On Fri, May 03, 2002 at 08:16:32PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> On Thu, May 02, 2002 at 07:15:09PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> > Seems to me that if bug severity is orthagonal to release criticality
>
> People keep saying that, but it's not true [0]. "Release critical bugs"
> are those that are serious, grave or critical.
Either this is not true, or the BTS documentation is wrong. I would be more
happy with a stance like "only bugs of severity serious, grave or critical
can be release critical" or, "release critical are those that are serious,
grave or critical and effect only architectures that are about to be
released". Because this would prevent anomalies like #144678.
Some people seem to think that a bug, despite how severe it is, does only
ever deserve a wishlist severity if they only affect the Hurd, and that if
the Hurd is about to release, that then we should go and bump up the
severity of all those bugs to the appropriate level. This does not seem
very efficient to me, and makes the definitions of the severities in the
debian-doc package (bug-maint-info) null and void, which talk about things
like "lost data" etc, but not about the release or the architectures.
> There may be subtle differences between the meanings of the various
> terms, but they are *very* strongly correlated, which is right at the
> other extreme from orthogonality.
They are only corrolated if you want to do that, and it causes anomalies and
fraction between developers, and make it impossible to manage bugs for an
unreleased architectures efficiently.
It would be easy to adjust the definition to make it more useful. I
suggested one way to look at it above, taking the architectures into account.
There might be others.
Maybe you were not really thinking about the problem of unreleased
architectures. I agree that for the more common case of a released
architectures, the rule "bug severity > serious == release critical" is a
quite strong correlation. I am sorry if I clouded this point in the above
by making a finer distinction.
Thanks,
Marcus
--
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org brinkmd@debian.org
Marcus Brinkmann GNU http://www.gnu.org marcus@gnu.org
Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: