On Mon, 2009-04-20 at 14:40 -0500, Jerry Amundson wrote: > >> If severity is supposed to mean "how bad a bug is for the reporter", > >> then ignoring the reporters assessment of that severity seems somewhere > >> between arrogant and counterproductive. > > > > Severity doesn't mean that. Both severity and priority are fields for > > maintainers and not for the reporter. > > Says who? > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_severity > > Severity This field describes the impact of a bug. > > Urgent This report is an urgent issue and should be fixes as soon as possible. > High Problem due to crashes, loss of data, severe memory, leak, etc. > Medium It's a bug that should be fixed eventually. > Low Problem is minor loss of function, or other problem where > easy workaround is present. Think about it: what's the actual practical advantage gained by having a field set in Bugzilla which tells you how important the bug is to the reporter, rather than how important it is to the project? Who does that benefit, and how? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
