Scott Kitterman <deb...@kitterman.com> writes: > This option makes multiple references to RC and non-RC bugs based on > actions of the policy editors.
> It's my understanding that determining if a bug is RC or not is a > Release Team function, not the policy editors. > Would it be better to use something like 'severe policy violation' (and > it's opposite) than Release Critical? No objections here but I think it's a minor issue. These are generally kept in sync except that the release team is free to declare violations of a Policy must to not be release-critical in the service of getting a release out and scoping the amount of work we're committing to do. (The contrary should *not* be true and only is due to lack of resources; anything that the release team considers release-critical should be a must in Policy, and bug reports are welcome in any place this is not in sync.) If a Policy must is declared not release critical for release after release, I'd like to synchronize and downgrade it to a should. The goal is for both policies to say the same thing except for temporary exceptions. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
