From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: where to send patches Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:25 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87y652bt1a.fsf@gmx.at> <6goc5kcbu4.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <87sjuwjb41.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1299702708 9345 80.91.229.12 (9 Mar 2011 20:31:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 20:31:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Rottmann , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 21:31:40 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PxQ2h-0001kU-7M for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 21:31:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34118 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PxQ2g-0000o7-Hy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34111 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PxQ2a-0000nd-2F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:29 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxQ2Z-0000Vg-5C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:27 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]:35783) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxQ2Z-0000Vc-2U for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:27 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43357) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PxQ2Y-0006wx-2a; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:31:26 -0500 X-Spook: Compsec advisors Albanian JSOFC3IP sweep Legion of Doom X-Ran: AqF*Iy|dRE"c^s%)<5j_pSrk=qB9H"1q&/F%I'pb%N*Gt~TRxJPW)7Q)N{?+m:{{N5uyKw X-Hue: red X-Attribution: GM In-Reply-To: <87sjuwjb41.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Wed, 09 Mar 2011 15:24:30 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:136995 Archived-At: Chong Yidong wrote: >> I did think about adding "Severity: normal" to the M-x report-emacs-bug >> boilerplate, and inviting people to adjust it if they wished. But maybe >> it makes reporting more complicated for little gain? > > It should be for Emacs developers to decide bug severity, not the > reporters. Ultimately, yes, but people can suggest what they think the severity should be. Minor for a doc typo, wishlist for a feature (anything with "feature request" etc in the subject is automatically classified as wishlist), important for a crash, etc. They have been able to do this for as long as we have been using debbugs. But I agree that it is not hugely helpful by itself.