On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 09:04:10PM +0100, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 01:51:30PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > >... > > What criteria are you using to classify this as a grave bug, given that > > the vast majority of sarge users will be running 2.4 kernels? I don't > > recall seeing anything that made 2.6 support a "must" for sarge, so I > > don't see that an RC severity is justified here. > "the vast majority of sarge users will be running 2.4 kernels"? Blahblahblah. The bug doesn't make it unusable for everyone, therefore it's not grave. Stop arguing about severities and fix the bug instead. If you're not able to do that, do something else that's productive instead. Cheers, aj -- Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/> I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred. Australian DMCA (the Digital Agenda Amendments) Under Review! -- http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/blog/copyright/digitalagenda
Attachment:
pgpCH6ROnhQOV.pgp
Description: PGP signature