Michael Albinus <address@hidden> writes:
> address@hidden (Phillip Lord) writes:
>
>>> `debbugs-emacs' would be misleading, because http://debbugs.gnu.org is
>>> also the bug tracker for other GNU projects.
>>
>> Yeah. But if I type M-x debbugs-gnu, I just get emacs bugs right?
>
> Emacs is the default package. You can change this by customizing
> `debbugs-gnu-default-packages'. Or you call interactively
> "C-u M-x debbugs-gnu".
>
> (For all what I claim here: pls blame me if it isn't documented in the
> User Guide)
I would add a shorter "debbugs". I would be intereted to know how many
enter via "-org" and how many via "-gnu".
FWIW, I found debbugs-org to be a bit buggy after I entered control messages for what I thought was the bug under the cursor only to find it sent control messages to a completely different bug. I'll... uh... file a bug on it or perhaps just fix it once I can reproduce it again.
>> One document which I think is missing is a "what all the tags" mean.
>
> I believe it is covered in the User Guide. If not sufficient, ask for
> clarification.
invalid? Different from notabug, wontfix, unreproducible?
pending? Pending what? Different from moreinfo?
patch? It includes one? Covers a bug report with a pull request?
And important, minor, normal, serious, wishlist. Is serious more
important than important? Or Important more serious than serious? What
criterion?
Pretty sure it must go, in order of decreasing severity: serious, important, normal. Serious probably is reserved for things like emacs crashing bugs, security vulnerabilities and the like. I don't know whether there is a rule about this, but I'd guess that new emacs versions shouldn't be released if any serious bugs are opened against it. Important is a bit unknown to me, I'm guessing just a bit scarier than the "normal" bugs.
security? valid only for bugs? or wishlists, RFE also?
Great questions, and once someone sheds light on the things like invalid and pending (I have no clue, personally), I'll write up the info in the bug-triage file.
Phil