| 1 |
We've been discussing this @FOSDEM too. My suggestion was that any bug that |
| 2 |
visibly hurts stable users should always be considered at least MAJOR in |
| 3 |
bugzilla. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
To expand on this a bit more |
| 6 |
* a stable update that makes the computer nonfunctional is definitely BLOCKER |
| 7 |
(and should be reverted in CVS immediately when it becomes known, at latest |
| 8 |
when it is understood, by anyone who is around at the time and can do so) |
| 9 |
* a non-functional stable package in the system set should be CRITICAL. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Just my 2ct, but it is really important not to hurt stable users. This is how |
| 12 |
we lose most people. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> I think that maybe we could have an even higher "priority" field called, |
| 16 |
> for example, "Broken Stable" that should be *only* used for that cases |
| 17 |
> and that arch teams should try fix sooner. What do you think? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
| 22 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
| 23 |
dilfridge@g.o |
| 24 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |
Archives