On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:17:23PM -0400, Boruch Baum wrote:
> I recently submitted what I considered a 'grave' bugreport to
> debian[1], which had its severity downgraded to 'wishlist' and its
> title changed, all because of systemd, which I suspect is irrelevant
> to my report.

The severity of 'grave' is indeed inappropriate. But so is 'wishlist':
the bug makes the package mostly useless to a non-negligible set of users.

Thus, I'd say it should be 'important'. As such, it is eligible for a
freeze exception if the Release Team agrees.

On the other hand, the maintainer has a lion's share of the right to decide
such matters, I see little chances to push such changes over a maintainer's
head. But, Eric Dorland did not say a single word about this matter yet.
The fight so far was between you (reporter) and John Paul Glaubitz (a third
party).

Thus, I'd recommend talking to Eric instead of complaining elsewhere. But,
merely reporting the issue would make you look like a nuisance after being
already swatted away by someone. Providing a tested patch _massively_
increases your chances to get the fix in, at least as long as the maintainer
is not hostile (and I have no reason yet to suspect Eric of that). And
making that patch a debdiff would also satisfy the requirement the Release
Team has (all freeze exception requests need to come with debdiffs).

As you have already investigated the bug and written an init script,
preparing such a patch should be only minor effort.

And if the patch doesn't get to stretch, not a single bit of your work would
be wasted: there's both buster and ascii...

On the third hand, though, the package appears to be very niche, which makes
it pretty low priority...


> [1] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=857322
--
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Meow!
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Collisions shmolisions, let's see them find a collision or second
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀ preimage for double rot13!