On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 03:53:56PM -0400, Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > * Andreas Barth ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > * Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061019 21:14]: > > > On Thu, Oct 19, 2006 at 09:06:42PM +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL > > > PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > * Mike Hommey ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061019 20:42]: > > > > > Note how subtly the Etch RC policy removes the first alternative of > > > > > the > > > > > serious bug description... > > > > > > > > Which do you mean? Please read the Etch RC policy. It tells: > > > > | In addition to the issues listed in this document, an issue is release > > > > | critical if it: > > > > | [...] > > > > | * in the maintainer's opinion, makes the package unsuitable > > > > | for release > > > > > > > > So, what does the Etch RC policy remove from the bugs.d.o description? > > > > > > 'is a severe violation of Debian policy (roughly, it violates a "must" or > > > "required" directive), or' > > > > The html-code for this part is: > > <DT><CODE>serious</CODE> > > <DD>is a <a href="http://release.debian.org/etch_rc_policy.txt">severe > > violation of Debian policy</a> (roughly, it violates a "must" or "required" > > directive), or, in the package maintainer's opinion, makes the package > > unsuitable for release. > > > > So, obviously http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities defines > > that "severe violation of Debian policy" means anything referenced in > > the etch_rc_policy-document. > > I would have thought that meant a violation of > http://www.us.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/.
That was not a link before it was changed before sarge release, in July 2004. Interesting log in the web page cvs: The RM defines what the 'serious' severity means. <jvw> regarding -a and -o in -test, aj, Kamion and vorlon said on June 8 that it is not considered RC by you guys. Okay to tag bugs with '... uses XSIisms (test ... -a/-o ...) with sarge-ignore? <aj> jvw: no, it's not okay for them to be marked RC in the first place <aj> http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt is the canonical place to look for the definition of "severe policy violation" <aj> sarge-ignore is not possible as it is not an RC issue [...] <jvw> aj: so you say http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities is wrong? <aj> whatever <jvw> I'm not going to be able to convince people that http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities is wrong, but I might be able to say it isn't a Sarge issue at least, but that involves sarge-ignore, which requires your okay <aj> it doesn't matter what that page says <aj> http://people.debian.org/~ajt/sarge_rc_policy.txt is canonical <aj> if the bug doesn't match the criteria on that page it's not serious grave or critical So, what is written on http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities doesn't count (not to say it's crap), and it's not necessary to change it. By the way, reportbug doesn't give anything close to a hint that it could be anything else than than Debian Policy: 3 serious is a severe violation of Debian policy (that is, the problem is a violation of a 'must' or 'required' directive); may or may not affect the usability of the package. Note that non-severe policy violations may be 'normal,' 'minor,' or 'wishlist' bugs. (Package maintainers may also designate other bugs as 'serious' and thus release-critical; however, end users should not do so.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]