* On 2012 26 Feb 14:12 -0600, Brian wrote: > Bug #660420 at most rates a severity level of 'Important'. Designating > it as 'Grave' to prevent it getting into testing is not the purpose of > the BTS.
Strangely, I thought it was intended to be used in such a manner as to keep severely broken package upgrades from Testing which, AIUI, is *supposed* to be stable enough to be frozen at any time so the remaining RC bugs can be shaken out for a Stable release. ISTM that parts of recent GNOME upgrades were kept out of Testing by this method. Breaking a swath of heretofore working PostScript printers seems grave enough to me to keep this update from affecting a larger user base. > Bug #660852 can be categorised in a similar way. I don't have his issue but I'm not going to deny he's experiencing trouble. > If the CUPS maintainers don't do downgrade it themselves I'd think of > doing it myself. I would suggest contacting the CUPS maintainers before stepping into their territory. Not consulting them before modifying their bugs seems rather impolite, perhaps even rude. Do you have any knowledge that they are unaware of this issue or disagree with the status of the bugs? - Nate >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears this is true." Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120226215527.ga8...@n0nb.us
