The updates firehose

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 11:10 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 15:19 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 23:12 -0400, Colin Walters wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2007-06-10 at 09:36 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > > 
> > > > The current classification we have is just 
> > > > "bugfix - enhancement - security". It would be nice add some more
> > > > categories to this, like "cosmetic" (for minor packaging cleanups like
> > > > directory ownership handling), and some way to differentiate by
> > > > severity. 
> > > 
> > > Why would someone push an update for cosmetic issues? 
> > Because what to consider cosmetic is largely up to the eye of the
> > beholder. I for one would consider changes which don't have any impact
> > on a binary rpm to be cosmetic, and anything else to be "bugfix".
> > 
> > That said, broken permissions/ownerships never are cosmetic, they are
> > real bug fixes.
> 
> Here is a typical example of what I consider cosmetic:
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=243689
> 
It's an example of what I call bug. 

I also consider it granted that you will be going to fix this for FC-7
ASAP.

Ralf