Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001
Hi, would it be possible to clarify the title of this post by adding for which distribution it is about: testing or unstable ? I guess it is for unstable, but packages in unstable are not meant to be released, only packages in testing. Even if testing does not import packages with RC bugs from unstable, RC bugs may be found *after* the package inclusion into testing. So it might be useful to have this post for both testing and unstable. How hard would it be to implement ? -- Laurent.
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 I thought aj introduced the serious severity so that important bugs wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like bugscan doesn't know that important bugs aren't RC. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux|If ignorance is bliss, [EMAIL PROTECTED] |is omniscience hell? http://www.debian.org/~branden/ | pgp6z8NyZIYcj.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: I thought aj introduced the serious severity so that important bugs wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like bugscan doesn't know that important bugs aren't RC. Thanks, fixed: @priorities = (serious, grave, critical); Those will be considered release-critical now. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \ | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ | | 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0 2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001
Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 I thought aj introduced the serious severity so that important bugs wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like bugscan doesn't know that important bugs aren't RC. I notice that some porters are still filing can't build from source bugs as 'important'; I realize the developers-reference package hasn't been updated yet, although the version in CVS has. A lot of such 'important' bugs are going to need to be upgraded to 'serious'. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 05:02:40PM +, Colin Watson wrote: Branden Robinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 I thought aj introduced the serious severity so that important bugs wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like bugscan doesn't know that important bugs aren't RC. I notice that some porters are still filing can't build from source bugs as 'important'; I realize the developers-reference package hasn't been updated yet, although the version in CVS has. A lot of such 'important' bugs are going to need to be upgraded to 'serious'. Well, packages that cannot be built wont be put into testing, basically because the version isn't compiled on all archs. So it wont be released anyway. IMO, build failures on non-release archs (those not in testing) should be considered important, while build failures on release archs (those in testing) should be considered serious. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
