ubuntu-bugcontrol team mailing list archive

[Paul White <mail@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Vej,

Just a couple of comments while I wait for others to reply.

On Sun, 16 Sep 2018, at 21:46, Vej wrote:

> >      I was involved in confirming the synaptic bug and marking it with "Low" importance as synaptic is no longer officially supported
> Well I do not really like the reasoning here. You should try to assess 
> the bugs importance related to the software you are dealing with. The 
> fact that "synaptic is no longer officially supported" does only mean 
> that this is of course a "non-core" application. Bugs in such 
> applications can still be severe if they render that specific 
> application unusable.

I gave this reason for marking with Low importance as that wording was given to me bu a Canonical developer in one of my own bug reports earlier this year. Probably said to reflect the likelihood of being fixed.

> >      Reproduced bug using current versions of Ubuntu and Thunderbird
> >      Looked for an upstream report but didn't find one
> >      Updated bug report to confirm bug still current
> >      Created upstream report and linked report ID
> >      Would mark with "Low" importance as affects limited scope of an application
> >      Updated with revised Mozilla bug as my report was a duplicate of an existing report that had not found when searching
> I would triage this as "Medium" according to "A bug that has a moderate 
> impact on a core application. " (firefox is a core application as it is 
> in the "ubuntu-desktop" task), as I regard the master password as an 
> essential aspect thus disqualifying the rule "Bugs that affect a non-
> essential aspect and limited scope of the application " used by you.

This bug was filed against Firefox, not Thunderbird which I believe is  not installed by default. Even if the reasoning was "Bugs that have a moderate impact on a non-core application " the importance would still be "Low".

Thank you for taking the time and to reply. It's very much appreciated.

Paul White