On 12 January 2011 12:43, Gary Poster <[email protected]> wrote: > We can come up with another mechanism other than priority to communicate > this, but why? It makes it harder to use the tools. > > I'd prefer if we still have a Critical importance that has some kind of > "exceptional" semantic and possibly a fairly hard, small limit for how many > should be a part of them. > > As a relatively-easy-to-implement change and a strawman, could we move most > of the current rules for High -> Medium, Critical -> High, and Critical to a > limited set, defined in some way like the old critical policy of "imminent > (possible or certain) significant danger"? Perhaps we can schedule a revisit > when we have OOPS bugs down
+1. We use 'critical' in bzr for 'really right now' and it's normally 0, and this makes it obvious when there is an emergency. If there are three categories in normal use and five available it seems a waste to not leave some headroom above the highest normal category. Is marking Oopses only High going to lead to people not addressing them? -- Martin _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
