Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001

2001-01-06 Thread Laurent Bonnaud
Hi, would it be possible to clarify the title of this post by adding for which distribution it is about: "testing" or "unstable" ? I guess it is for "unstable", but packages in "unstable" are not meant to be released, only packages in "testing". Even if "testing" does not import packages with R

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001

2001-01-05 Thread Ben Collins
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 05:02:40PM +, Colin Watson wrote: > Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: > >> Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) > >> > >> Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 > > > >I thought aj i

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001

2001-01-05 Thread Colin Watson
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: >> Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) >> >> Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 > >I thought aj introduced the "serious" severity so that "important" bugs >wouldn't be consi

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001

2001-01-05 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Branden Robinson wrote: > I thought aj introduced the "serious" severity so that "important" bugs > wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like bugscan > doesn't know that important bugs aren't RC. Thanks, fixed: @priorities = ("serious", "grave", "critic

Re: Release-critical Bugreport for January 5, 2001

2001-01-05 Thread Branden Robinson
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 06:00:08AM -0600, BugScan reporter wrote: > Bug stamp-out list for Jan 5 05:13 (CST) > > Total number of release-critical bugs: 482 I thought aj introduced the "serious" severity so that "important" bugs wouldn't be considered release-critical anymore, but it looks like b