On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 07:21:35 +0200, Andreas Barth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> * Manoj Srivastava ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [061023 20:14]:
>> Strawman. No one is proosing that; we already have a mechanism for
>> making serious bugs non-RC (etch-ignore tags).
> Etch-ignore tags are usually used for issues where we expect them to
> be RC after etch releases. If we think an issue won't be RC for
> etch+1 etc, then adjusting the severity is correct.
I would assume violations of policy MUST directives are either
bugs in policy, which should be fixed, or an issue in the package
that needs to be fixed after etch releases.
If you are aware of issues that are violations of muSt
directives that are never going to be RC, there should be a bug
opened on policy with severity important for every one of them.
manoj
--
Any discovery is more likely to be exploited by the wicked than
applied by the virtuous. -- Marion J. Levy, Jr.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
