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

Bug#509732: closed by Don Armstrong <don@debian.org> (Re: Bug#509732: Kalle's message #68)

> From: Don Armstrong <don@debian.org>
> To: 509732-done@bugs.debian.org
> Subject: Re: Bug#509732: Kalle's message #68
> Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:53:34 -0800
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
> On Sat, 27 Dec 2008, José Luis González wrote:
> > And can another developer file a serious bug if an error was found
> > in the Manual? If so, please, let the description of Severe in the
> > canonical location be updated.
> If such a bug was possible, it would fall afoul of "makes unrelated
> software on the system (or the whole system) break".

The bug is about the Manual, not the policy package. The debian-policy
package wouldn't "[make] unrelated software on the system (or the whole
system) break," only the Manual. If the erroneous Manual was not yet in
the package that severity wouldn't apply to the package. If it was, the
severity would apply to the Document in the package. The former isn't
"falling afoul of", the latter could.

> > My point was that if nobody able to set the severity to serious
> > cared about it the error could remain and so the RC bugs it could
> > have caused.
> Anyone can set the severity to an RC level; only certain people can
> make the final adjudication of severity.

And according to the description of severities none of the RC levels
are appliable to the hypothetical case described above.

> > Yes, it is. I understand the description of serious only legitimates
> > the mantainer to set this severity to the policy package when a bug
> > about an error in the Manual that can lead to RC bugs is filed.
> I'm not following you at all here. It sounds like you're concerned
> about some kind of hypothetical bug in policy which could cause
> breakage in other packages. If such a bug were to happen, and it were
> filed against the debian-policy package, it will have its severity
> properly set

It can't have it's severity set to an RC level if the current
description of severities is applied, for the reasons stated before
(please, see Message #80 and #111.)

It is not whether it is possible per-se to set the severity, but that
the current descriptions of severities do not make that hypothetical bug
RC. Since they don't make it RC, whomever wishes to set the severity to
RC could see somebody else set it back to non-RC and if there was a
disagreement between both, it would be necessary that a Release Manager
considered it RC and intervened since the description would make it

> , as there are no less than 10 people who read this list
> who are also policy maintainers and/or RMs and/or responsible for the
> BTS.

May I know if bugs under debian-policy are sent to the list? If they
are not automatically it is still possible that it won't get into the
list and won't have its severity properly set.

> Regardless, I'd much rather restrict myself to the non-hypothetical
> problems that we need to deal with in Debian, so I'll stop here.
> Closing this report with this message.

Please, do not close bugs just because you don't want to deal with
them. If the bug is still present it must remain open. If you can
argument that the bug is not present anymore I will accept that it is
closed. Since this hasn't happened yet I am going to reopen.

If you are still uncomfortable with this bug getting too much attention
please remember that its severity is minor.

Reply to: