On Sat, 17 May 2014, Russ Allbery wrote: > I think defining critical as: > > makes the entire system unusable, or causes serious data loss, or > introduces a security hole on systems where you install the package > > is closer to how we actually use the severity, and would avoid some of > these bug severity arguments.
I'm OK with either adding additional clarification or adopting this language. In my opinion, the wording of the severity levels is really there to give bug submitter guidance to the initial severity they select; ideally it represents the consensus view of most maintainers. If it doesn't represent the consensus view, I'd like to change it. Individual maintainers should feel free[0] to use the severity levels of bugs to set their own personal priority without regard to what the definition says.[1] 0: With the exception of whether bugs have severity >= serious; that can be overridden by the RMs. 1: But they shouldn't be surprised when a submitter follows the "consensus view". -- Don Armstrong http://www.donarmstrong.com Life would be way easier if I were easier. -- a softer world #473 http://www.asofterworld.com/index.php?id=473 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20140520024328.gb23...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
