Hi,
On Tue, 11 Sep 2007, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> I don't see why I should not change the severity of a report against a
> package I'm not maintaining if the severity looks incorrect and the
> maintainance team didn't state anything about the severity. If you were
> basing that on something, plea
Le lundi 10 septembre 2007 07:19, Guillem Jover a écrit :
> On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 21:22:00 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > severity 432893 important
> > thanks
> >
> > Le mercredi 29 août 2007 12:51, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:12:10AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 21:22:00 -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> severity 432893 important
> thanks
>
> Le mercredi 29 août 2007 12:51, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> > On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:12:10AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > > Hi Kurt,
> > > I don't necessarily think that this bug is not RC,
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> severity 432893 serious
Bug#432893: dpkg: Failed install followed by failed remove results in installed
state
Severity set to `serious' from `important'
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking
On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:12:10AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
>
> Hi Kurt,
> I don't necessarily think that this bug is not RC, I just assumed it wasn't.
> Severity was set to serious indirectly by the cloned bug's severity. While
> the severity against ghc seemed fine, I think it's unlikely
5 matches
Mail list logo
