tags 593537 + patch forwarded 593537 https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=245085 # severity 593537 serious, but I don't want to play severity ping pong. thanks
Dear Noah, On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 03:16:11PM -0400, Noah Meyerhans wrote: > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 02:06:56PM -0500, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > > > severity 593537 important > > > thanks > > > > Could you please expain why the severity was brought down with > > absolutely no explanation? Have I made a mistake in filing the bug > > report, or is there a lack of information which I have provided? > > http://www.debian.org/Bugs/Developer#severities describes the > severities. Note that when the description for e.g. "grave" says "makes > the package in question unusable or mostly so", the bug really needs to > affect *everybody* who tries to use the package. That's clearly not the > case, as there are quite a few people who are using choqok with no > troubles. Fair enough. > Note that I'm in no way saying that this is *not* a bug, but it's > certainly not suggest that the current choqok packages are unsuitable > for release, which is implied by a "grave" severity. Well, I now propose the severity "serious", since the package can exist without libqca2-plugin-ossl. So, steps to reproduce are: sudo aptitude purge libqca2-plugin-ossl choqok - Try to add Twitter, and observe the crash Solution: libqca2-plugin-ossl should be a dependency for choqok. Naturally, there may be an error I have caused; if so, please let me know. Thanks. Kumar P. S. This may also be the solution for http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=592374 -- ...and scantily clad females, of course. Who cares if it's below zero outside. -- Linus Torvalds -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
