Definition of a "blocker" bug ?

[Björn JACKE]

On 2010-01-05 at 15:29 -0800 Jeremy Allison sent off:
> Volker and I ended up having an interesting
> discussion in a bug report about the meaning
> of the term "blocker" as a severity catagory
> in bug reports.
> 
> I have a definition I'd like to propose -
> 
> A "blocker" bug that will prevent a release
> is one of the following problems:
> 
> Security holes.
> Data corruption.
> Resource leaks (covers fd's, memory etc.)
> Unrecoverable client-visible errors.
> 
> Let me know what you think.

I brought up the same topic last year in October:

http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/2009-October/067362.html

Basically Christian's view of regressions inside a stable branch is how I would
define a blocker, too.

A new mayor release however (like 3.5.0) should have stricter rules for bugs
being a blocker. For example a newly found regression from an ancient 3.0
release might here be a blocker while it's by definition no blocker for a 3.4.4
release because that regression had already been in previous 3.4.x releases.

Cheers
Björn
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.samba.org/pipermail/samba-technical/attachments/20100107/f5541c61/attachment.pgp>