| 1 |
Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 09/20/2011 12:34 AM, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I've filed two bug reports today[1][2]. Now, when filing bugs, the |
| 4 |
>> dropdown for 'severity' includes "Critical: The software crashes, |
| 5 |
>> hangs, or causes you to lose data." |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> One bug did cause data loss (a configuration wipe; I'm now amused I |
| 8 |
>> can use the bugtracker as a backup), and both bugs are indicated by |
| 9 |
>> software crashes. Both bugs have also been downgraded to 'major' by |
| 10 |
>> the bug wranglers. Am I misunderstanding something? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> [1]https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383695 |
| 13 |
>> [2]https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=383751 |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
> To be honest, I downgraded the severity on those bugs to turn off the |
| 16 |
> distracting red highlight in the bug listing as I was wrangling. You did |
| 17 |
> nothing wrong. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> In my defense, if you take Gentoo Linux as a whole, problems with grip |
| 20 |
> and bzr rank very low compared with more critical system packages. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Anyway, if you have a problem with the way I treat your bugs, feel free |
| 23 |
> to call me out on it. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
I always leave it at the default and if needed mention the severity of |
| 27 |
the problem in the comments section. The way I figure it is this, the |
| 28 |
bug wrangler would likely know if it is serious enough to change it to |
| 29 |
something that gets faster attention. Plus, if it is extremely bad, |
| 30 |
he/she would also have a email address to get even quicker attention. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Now if it was something that I knew was 100% serious, maybe then I would |
| 33 |
but off hand, I can't even think of a example of that. Even if it was a |
| 34 |
serious gcc bug, most of us have two installed and could just switch to |
| 35 |
another one. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Would this be a good way to do this? |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Dale |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
:-) :-) |
Archives