Re: Bug reports and severity
On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 03:18:27PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2005 at 04:29:05PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > Any thoughts on such a policy?
> I assume we're talking about FTBFS bugs which theoricaly should be reported
> as serious (we have a few GNU/kFreeBSD bugs in the style of #307475, too).
> When Marcus Brinkmann started the GNU/Hurd port, he started using the "serious"
> severity for FTBFS bugs, but this was disruptive wrt the release process (e.g.
> britney) so they switched to important.
important is indeed the correct severity here. Bugs that only affect
arches (and lets assume for the moment that kfreebsd-* and stuff are arches
until our tools can handle it otherwise) that aren't released and aren't
planned to be released aren't RC. Once an arch is considered for
inclusion in release they can be upgraded (which is probably happening
to the AMD64 specific bugs soon, when it is finally in the archive).
Frank Lichtenheld <email@example.com>