* Eric Lavarde - Debian Bugs ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Hi, > > I don't consider this to be normal: I use Linux for work, I almost always > save on FAT because I need to have dual-boot with Windows. > And this is currently seriously impacting my productivity, as I never know > if what I'm saving will have size 0 or "only" change its name. > I also don't think that this is such an exotic setup, lots of people have > dual-boot Windows/Linux with a shared partition formatted with FAT. > As for loss of data: if I download something with size 0 and go travelling > (it's my laptop), and find out that I don't have the data I need > available, I consider this as being data loss, especially if it appears in > front of the customer.
You may consider this to be data loss, but it isn't. Data loss implies you lost something, ie you were in possession of something and then lost it. If downloading fails you never had it to begin with. > I don't want to start a severity-setting-war, but I would greatly > appreciate to have the severity of this issue set higher (even better > would be to have it fixed quickly :-> ). Well the severity is not a stick to get things fixed more quickly. The best question to ask yourself is should this bug prevent Iceweasel from being part of the release? If you think that it should then your priorities are a bit out of whack. > Mike Hommey said: > > severity 407023 normal > > thanks > > > > On Tue, Jan 30, 2007 at 02:19:36PM +0100, Eric Lavarde - Debian Bugs > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> severity 407023 critical > >> thanks > >> > >> (severity changed as per my last bug report) > > > > Come on, this has nothing critical. It barely has a small impact for > > people saving directly to FAT. > > > > Mike > > > > > > -- Eric Dorland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ICQ: #61138586, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1024D/16D970C6 097C 4861 9934 27A0 8E1C 2B0A 61E9 8ECF 16D9 70C6
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
