Re: Severity of "should this package be orphaned/removed" bugs

(Dropping Cc on #453487 and Moritz since the reason for the upgrade of this bug was clarified already) On 27/03/08 at 19:22 +0100, Luk Claes wrote: > > We really need to clarify the severities for the "Should this > > > package be orphaned/removed" bugs. > > I would agree to go with: > > - seriou

Bug#473158: PTS testing status is stale

Package: qa.debian.org User: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Usertag: pts Hi, The PTS's testing status appears not to be updating. By way of an example: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/$ grep-excuses devscripts devscripts (2.10.18.1 to 2.10.20) Maintainer: Devscripts Devel Team Too young, only 2 of 10 days old

Re: Severity of "should this package be orphaned/removed" bugs

Lucas Nussbaum wrote: >> PROP_RM bugs could be RC severity, but if so I would remove the >> mentioning of orphaning in the template so it's clear for everyone that >> it should not be used lightly and strong arguments are needed for >> orphaning instead of removal... > > I would personally prefer