* martin f krafft ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061009 12:39]: > also sprach Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006.10.09.1200 +0200]: > > I don't want to say "everything is nice" (and please feel free to > > continue working on this bug), but I don't think this bug is > > release-critical aka "we need to fix it prior to release". So, setting > > severity back to important (aka "this is an ugly bug and should be > > fixed"). > > I almost agree. Even though I *have* lost data to this bug, I have > not been able to work my way forward. It is a real bitch. > > Anyway, wouldn't it be better to leave it at "grave" (aka causes > data loss) but tag it etch-ignore because
Why? I don't think I'll mark it as RC for etch+1 as well. Of course, being important doesn't prevent this bug from being fixed. It just doesn't prevent us to release Etch if this bug is unfixed. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
