

Re: Interesting comments

James Laska wrote:
On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 11:10 +0900, John Summerfield wrote:
Adam Williamson wrote:

Priority and severity can be set by reporters in MDV Bugzilla. It was my
experience that reporters would frequently inflate these values in their
initial reports. However, if a triage team member then re-set them to a
Last I looked (which was a while ago) there was no apparent definition of that these mean. Let me think:

While the URL doesn't start with fedoraproject.org ... I typically
reference how a formal support team defines severity.  For example:
http://www.redhat.com/support/policy/GSS_severity.html.  The wording of
course is centered around a formal support organization, but the
sentiment echoes what you've supplied John.

I'm not surprised:-) In a former life, I supported OS on IBM mainframes. IBM did publish definitions, but it was a _long_ time ago....

Would it make sense to begin fleshing out a definition in
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Bugzilla/Severity ?

Critical - system unusable
Serious - system usable with some impairment, or critical but with a workaround.
Moderate - causes occasional outages, misleading diagnostic messages
Cosmetic - spelling/grammar errors
Enhancement Request - not exactly a bug, but ....

Everyone would probably agree that, if the system won't boot, that is critical. I would expect such a critical error would be a candidate release blocker.

Probably, most would also reckon that a daily crash would qualify as critical, as would any major component such as X failing.

As a user, I see Xen failures as critical. I bought a computer, with hardware virtualisation, just so I could use Xen. _I_ might accept that, on the above scale, it might be classified as "serious," but anything less would annoy me.




-- spambait
1aaaaaaa coco merseine nu  Z1aaaaaaa coco merseine nu
-- Advice

You cannot reply off-list:-)
