Bug reports and severity

[Aurelien Jarno]

Hi all,

I wanted to have your opinion on the bugs reports we do for GNU/kFreeBSD 
and their severity. I think if we want to be able to release with Etch 
we need a more agressive policy.

Currently I am reporting bugs with "Severity" wishlist (after all this 
is an unsupported architecture). However, I should admit that I don't 
have a lot of success (bugs waiting for months).

I have seen that the Hurd guys are more agressive, they are reporting 
them with severity "Important", and they seems to have more success. For 
example with the gdm package, their patch was accepted in a short period 
of time, whereas we are *still* waiting for more than 300 days. Our bug 
is "Wishlist", their is "Important".

I am therefore proposing the following policy, in the case a *patch is 
provided*:
- severity "Normal" if the package was never built before on
   GNU/kFreeBSD
- severity "Important" if the package was built before on GNU/kFreeBSD,
   ie there is a regression

I think we should not fill a bug report specific to GNU/kFreeBSD without 
a patch or without a clear description of what to do, ie config update 
or libtool update (I am almost considering that as a patch), because we 
don't have a developper accessible machine. Being not enough agressive 
makes a lot patches sitting in the BTS. Being too agressive makes the 
port loosing credibility.

Any thoughts on such a policy?

Bye,
Aurelien

-- 
   .''`.  Aurelien Jarno	            | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
  : :' :  Debian GNU/Linux developer | Electrical Engineer
  `. `'   aurel32@debian.org         | aurelien@aurel32.net
    `-    people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net