On 14-Jun-06, 11:18 (CDT), Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Many (most?) maintainers use the BTS severity state to manage their
> worklist. That is, the severity is a largley a note to themselves as
> to which order to do things in or what priority to give them.
So http://www.debian.
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Thomas Bushnell BSG writes ("Re: severities of blocking bugs"):
>> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > As opposed to writing to demand that the maintainer spend their free
>> > time to help you
Thomas Bushnell BSG writes ("Re: severities of blocking bugs"):
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > As opposed to writing to demand that the maintainer spend their free
> > time to help you fix your problem !
>
> How does adjusting the severity of a
* Fri 2006-06-09 Ian Jackson
> If some program lacks a feature or bugfix you want for your package,
> then _implement it_ instead of whining !
>
> Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
> +patch and say something like:
Nope. If you happend to send a patch to fix the pr
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 09:41:34AM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> > When you make a wishlist bug RC, you are by definition forcing someone
> > else to spend time on it, either to fix it or play BTS ping pong with
> > you, since their package doesn't need to be kept out of the next stable
> > r
Stephen Gran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
>> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
>> > +patch and say something like:
>>
>> How do you think I should have applied
This one time, at band camp, Thomas Bushnell BSG said:
> Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
> > +patch and say something like:
>
> How do you think I should have applied this advice in the case of bug
> #360851?
In the
Ian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Most maintainers are much more cooperative when you tag the bug as
> +patch and say something like:
How do you think I should have applied this advice in the case of bug
#360851?
> As opposed to writing to demand that the maintainer spend their free
> ti
Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: severities of blocking bugs"):
> Well, consider this. If there is a feature someone wants from
> a package, say kernel-pack^H^H^H^Hfoo.
>[most of scenario snipped -iwj]
> Can one now change the wishlist bug to grave as
On 7 Jun 2006, Thomas Bushnell verbalised:
>
> 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 don't think so.
> I have recently been told by a maintainer that my logic in this
> regard is faulty. I
On Wed, Jun 07, 2006 at 04:42:37PM -0700, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
> Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > 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
Goswin von Brederlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You probably hit a soft spot there because suddenly the bug became RC
> and blocks the package from entering testing. The destinction between
> normal and important is purely visual while serious and above have
> real effects.
This may be true, b
Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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.
Well, except that it seems to me that any code generat
Thomas Bushnell BSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> 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.
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
Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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 m
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
17 matches
Mail list logo
