Re: PROPOSAL: Blocking the release is our only "big hammer" — let's add a softer one.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 14/10/2016 11:07 AM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-10-13 at 19:33 +1000, Jeff Fearn wrote:
>>> That's not the intent of the fields as I understand them. 'severity' is
>>> supposed to represent how bad the bug is, whereas 'priority' is
>>> supposed to represent how important it is to get it fixed compared to
>>> other bugs in the same component. They're obviously related, but not
>>> the same, and it's not "severity is the reporter's opinion, priority is
>>> the maintainers' opinion", no.
>> My understanding is based on ye olde services plan:
>>
>> "Bugzilla Severity and Priority
>>
>> When filing a new bug report, or actioning an existing bug, it is
>> important to bear in mind that, while both the 'Severity' and 'Priority'
>> fields are required; 'Priority' is an internal weighting and 'Severity'
>> is customer weighting. This distinction can cause confusion if not
>> consistant."
>>
>> This is only significant in that it may have impacted the way they are
>> coded on BRC.
>>
>>> I think you might be right that we allow the bug reporter to set
>>> 'severity', though.
>> BRC carries a custom patch to restrict priority to a group besides
>> editbugs group (the setpriority group), AFAICT there is no code that
>> allows similar restriction of the severity field.
> Ah, interesting. I don't really have any particular source for my
> understanding of them, it's just something I've been carrying around
> for a while, I guess. However, Fedora definitely does not handle bugs
> the same as RHEL, so we're not necessarily *bound* by that
> definition...but we could use it if we liked.

Hell no, but if a restriction on who can set severity was wanted we'd
have to add a patch for that. Whereas for priority all you'd need is
another BZ group and just switch the group inheritance.

Not that I think either of those fields are good for marking something
as a blocker for the distribution, a blocker flag would be more useful
for that IMO.

Cheers, Jeff.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux