On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 07:08:00PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Wed, 07 Jun 2006, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote: > > I have always thought that when bug X is blocking bug Y, the severity > > of bug X should be at least as big as the severity of bug Y.
> > I have recently been told by a maintainer that my logic in this regard > > is faulty. Is it? > Depends on how you are going to use the blocking facility, I suppose. I do > agree with your reasoning, though: if Y is critical and cannot be fixed > without fixing X, X is also critical. It doesn't matter at all what > priority X would have IF it were not a blocker for Y: at the moment it > became a blocker for Y, it became part of the problem causing Y. Nope. A corner-case bug in a compiler may break compilation of a single package. The build failure of this package is a serious bug for this package; it is not a serious bug for the compiler. The BTS "blocks" feature may also be used to express "I'm not working on this bug because I believe the long-term correct solution is to fix this other bug first", or "it's much easier to fix this bug if another bug is fixed first". If the bug you're not working on is a build failure, that's an RC bug on your package -- that doesn't entitle you to mark other bugs as RC just because it would be convenient for you. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
