[Webapps-common-packages] Bug#453487: Severity of "should this package be orphaned/removed" bugs

[Lucas Nussbaum]

On 27/03/08 at 10:12 +0000, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
> Processing commands for control at bugs.debian.org:
> 
> > severity 453487 serious
> Bug#453487: Should this package be orphaned?
> Severity set to `serious' from `important'

Hi,

We really need to clarify the severities for the "Should this
package be orphaned/removed" bugs.

In my initial proposal[1], I proposed to use severity:serious for both
prop-orphaned and prop-removed bugs (and nobody objected to that back
then). The rationale for the release-criticality of those bugs is that
we really want to clarify that situation (and have a maintainer for that
package) before we release.

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/10/msg00406.html

However, since then, Luk Claes downgraded the severity of some of those
bugs to important, and some other people filed bugs as
severity:important.

I don't have a strong opinion about that, but we really should clarify
the situation, so all the bugs of the same class have the same severity,
and we can stop the stupid & frustrating BTS ping-pong.

I would agree to go with:
- serious for "proposed removal" bugs
- important for "proposed orphan" bugs. After all, we release with a lot
  of orphaned packages, and unmaintained packages aren't really
  different.
However, I fear that, since the "proposed orphan" bugs won't be RC, some
maintainers might ignore them more easily. Also, it prevents them from
being listed in ddpo-by-mail, for example.

Luk, what are the reasons why you think that severity: important is more
suitable than severity: serious? If it's only because it blocks testing
transitions, we could mark the bugs as found in the testing version
where needed, so testing transitions can still happen.

If that's because it "artificially" makes the RC bug count higher, we
could tag the bugs lenny-ignore where applicable (that is, where the
security team doesn't think that it's a too big problem to release that
package without maintainer).

What do you think?

Thank you,
-- 
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas at lucas-nussbaum.net   http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas at nussbaum.fr             GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |