[Danny, see below for a request.] In my review of open PRs against the 4.1 branch, I'm going to adopt a new convention.
Until now, when I've decided something is not important enough to require fixing for a particular release, I unset the target milestone. That's confusing because it might seem to mean that I'm saying the bug *can't* be fixed for a particular release, which isn't true. So, I'm going to adopt a new convention in these cases. In particular, I'm going to leave the target milestone alone, but set the priority field. P1 bugs will be bugs I think absolutely must be fixed before the next release; releasing with this bug would be diastrous. I'd like to use P2 to indicate that I've review the bug, and that it does not merit P1 status, but is important. So, Danny, is there any chance we could make it impossible for submitters to set this value and make P3 the default instead of P2? Severity is supposed to be "if this problem affects you, how bad is it?"; submitters can reasonably answer that. However, priority should be "in the grand scheme of things, how urgent is it that this shoudl be fixed?"; only we can decide that. P3 would then be the default, and would indicate that I've not yet reviewed the bug. P4 bugs will be ones I consider too unimportant to block the current release. P5 bugs will be ones I consider too unimportant to block *any* future release. I'm going to add links to the main web page to query for the regressions I think are important enough to block a release. -- Mark Mitchell CodeSourcery, LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] (916) 791-8304
