Re: severity changes post-release

[Luis Villa <louie ximian com>]

On Fri, 2002-06-07 at 15:29, Daniel Egger wrote:
> Am Fre, 2002-06-07 um 15.08 schrieb Luis Villa:
> 
> > but that loses us some generality [as does 'critical'->'crasher', FWIW,
> > which is maybe a consideration.] Any thoughts?
> 
> Risky, I'd prefer to change NEW bugs to UNCONFIRMED ones over a few
> subreleases since in general bugs tend to fade away but new versions are
> never rechecked against old bugs.

Eh? I'm not quite sure what you mean to say here...

I'm afraid perhaps I was unclear- I'm not talking about moving specific
bugs, I'm talking about renaming the priority options available for all
bugs.

Specific to your issue, post-release[1], I'm also going to be
agressively closing[2] bugs that are /extremely/ old [see, for example,
the list I sent out last night], have bad version information[3], or are
otherwise useless [lots of 1.2 bugs out there, for example.]

Luis

[1] assuming I'm still delegated by Ximian to work on GNOME stuff
[2] or helping organize volunteers to close :) 
[3] yes, this requires better scripting to handle version information in
bug-buddy, and agressive updating of versioning in bugzilla products