severity 432893 important
thanks
Le mercredi 29 août 2007 12:51, Kurt Roeckx a écrit :
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2007 at 09:12:10AM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote:
> > Hi Kurt,
> > I don't necessarily think that this bug is not RC, I just assumed it
> > wasn't. Severity was set to serious indirectly by the cloned bug's
> > severity. While the severity against ghc seemed fine, I think it's
> > unlikely that the dpkg part of the bug is considered serious, now that
> > the report is more than 2 months old and there are no reports of other
> > people experiencing the bug, or reports of the bug with other packages
> > than ghc, which appears fixed.
>
> There were 2 problems in the original bug report, and I consider both
> RC. The ghc one has been fixed/worked around in an other package that
> generated the maintainer scripts.
>
> The dpkg one is one that should be easy to reproduce, I just didn't
> see anybody try or suggest that it's not a problem, or that it has been
> fixed.
OK. Nevertheless, I'm not convinced that this bug is release-critical, so I'm
downgrading to important again. Do not upgrade the severity to serious again,
as this bug is not a policy violation, unless you have evidence that the dpkg
maintainance team considers it serious. Feel free to ask the maintainers to
upgrade the severity to serious.
