On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:53:39AM +0300, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > ti, 2006-05-16 kello 09:53 +0200, Bas Zoetekouw kirjoitti: >> Lars wrote:
>>>> The usage is mendantory (aka a must clause) but the bugs are not >>>> RC? This does not fit. >>> It violates policy, but not in a way enumerated on >>> http://release.debian.org/etch_rc_policy.txt, which means that it isn't >>> release critical, unless I've misunderstood something. >> AFAIK, vilolating policy always waarent a serious bug: >> | serious >> | is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a >> | "must" or "required" directive), or, in the package maintainer's >> | opinion, makes the package unsuitable for release. >> [http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities] > This is not what Steve Langasek tells me (or else I'm seriously > misunderstanding). The etch_rc_policy.txt document is what documents > what is release critical. Doesn't that mean the bug is severity serious, but should be tagged "etch-ignore"? That's what we did with sarge, if I remember well? -- Lionel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]