Disagree on almost all points but I find debates about bug severities so utterly demotivating I will defer.
-lamby On Mon, 21 Dec 2015, at 08:19 PM, Dominic Hargreaves wrote: > On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 08:35:29PM +0100, gregor herrmann wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Dec 2015 20:49:50 +0200, Niko Tyni wrote: > > > > > While I'm not going to start a severity war (and agree that the package > > > should be fixed), this is not the traditional interpretation. FTBFS bugs > > > have been routinely downgraded to 'important' in the past when the build > > > failures were nondeterministic and the build succeeded part of the time. > > > > That's my understanding as well. > > Just yesterday I downgraded a bug of this type to important after > > consulting with a member of the release team. > > I agree with Niko and gregoa. I don't see a practical benefit of making > such bugs RC in the general case. I'm sure there are circumstances > where it would be justified, but based on my experience with perl and > some of the more esoteric architectures, I think such a policy would > do more harm than good. > > Dominic. Regards, -- ,''`. : :' : Chris Lamb `. `'` la...@debian.org / chris-lamb.co.uk `-