Date: 11 May 2000 11:07:47 -0400 From: Lowell Gilbert <lowell@be-well.ilk.org> To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: serverity/priority criteria (was Re: ports/18499) Message-ID: <44hfc55dmk.fsf@lowellg.ne.mediaone.net> In-Reply-To: <jedgar@FreeBSD.ORG>'s message of "Thu, 11 May 2000 06:29:05 -0700 (PDT)" References: <200005111329.GAA04345@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<jedgar@FreeBSD.ORG> writes: > Although I doubt this PR would be considered 'serious'. I've kind of wondered about this myself. The problem keeps the port from building. What are the criteria for determining an appropriate severity and priority for ports PRs? If you go by the send-pr documentation, it seems reasonable to say that this problem was in fact not serious but *critical*, because "the ... component ... is completely non-operational..." on the theory that the PR applies to the port as a component. However, that would make nearly all ports bugs "critical," which seems a little silly. My own inclination in my own PRs has been that a non-working port is severe but not necessarily a high priority. A high priority would be more like fixing a security hole. I can kind of see an argument for looking at it the other way around, though. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?44hfc55dmk.fsf>