Classifying bugs

Classifying bugs

[Stefan Monnier]

In order to prepare for Emacs-23, we need to start sorting out the bugs
that need to be fixed.  For this, the best thing to do is to mark bugs
in the bug-tracker with the `critical' severity.

I.e. any bug you think need to be fixed before we can release Emacs-23
should be marked `critical'.  On the contrary, any bug which should not
prevent the release should not be marked `critical' (if that bug is more
severe than just `normal', then mark it as `important', as is the case
for #620).


        Stefan

Re: Classifying bugs

[Glenn Morris]

Stefan Monnier wrote:

> In order to prepare for Emacs-23, we need to start sorting out the bugs
> that need to be fixed.  For this, the best thing to do is to mark bugs
> in the bug-tracker with the `critical' severity.

I would suggest that "serious" is better:

i) It fits in with the standard debbugs definitions
(http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/Developer#severities)

ii) It leaves room to classify security holes, data loss bugs, etc as
really "critical".


Also, you need to provide some guidelines, else this will be subjective.
For Emacs 22.1, almost any bug was release-blocking.
As a specific example, is any nextstep-only issue a "critical" bug to you?
(Presumably not, given than 620 isn't.)