clone 543815 -1 reassign -1 reportbug retitle -1 overinflated linux-2.6 bug reports stop
dear reportbug maintainer, never seen this trouble so nicely phrased. On Sun, 30 Aug 2009, Stephen Dowdy wrote: > RE: > [ Severity set to 'important' from 'critical' Request was from maximilian > attems <m...@debian.org> ] > > I just wanted to point out that i had difficulty determining HOW to address > the severity field in reportbug. > > Because i *do* have a workaround to the "problem", it's not critical to *me* > anymore, and wasn't at the point i submitted the bug. > > But the question that debian reportbug asks is: > > -------------------------------- > > How would you rate the severity of this problem or report? > > 1 critical makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole > system) break, or causes serious data loss, or introduces a security hole on > systems where > you install the package. > 2 grave makes the package in question unusable by most or all > users, or causes data loss, or introduces a security hole allowing access to > the accounts > of users who use the package. > 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.) > 4 important a bug which has a major effect on the usability of a > package, without rendering it completely unusable to everyone. > ... > > Please select a severity level: [normal] > > -------------------------------- > > in a generic sense, this *problem* is critical, because it > DOES render end-user systems broken. "...makes...(or the whole system) > break..." > (not being able to boot due to kernel panic certainly falls under "system > breakage") > So, given the language from reportbug, i answered honestly that this > bug does indeed break the whole system, therefore it is a critical problem. > > my *specific* problem *report* itself is not critical, because i am > operational now that i've determined the nature of the problem. > (if i were under a security compliance obligation and was still > incapable of booting my system due to this bug, i would consider > this problem VERY critical) > > So, in this reply, i am simply voicing my concern that a better > wording in reportbug addressing this type of discrepency be employed. > > Perhaps a distinction between end-user "urgency" and problem "severity" > is needed. > > It's certainly not my intent to distract developers from more > important tasks (i can tell from other bug reports i'm not the only > one affected by this, but i don't believe the affected end-user > base is very large) I only bring this up, because i've also seen > other users wonder about how to classify bug report severity as well. > > thanks, > --stephen *one* box not booting is not a critical bug in the sense that it works on X other boxes, so it doesn' make the package unusable for all the other, could you have an cuttof for linux-2.6 submittions on important severity and let us maintainer upgrade specific ones, instead of beeing bothered every day to have to downgrade X reports. thanks -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
