Comment 76 for bug 86685

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010 08:18:09 -0000, Chucky <email address hidden> wrote:
> Dear James Westby,
> Dear Ubuntu hacker,
>
> I am sorry not to understand as well as you do the in's and out's of
> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates, so can I ask you to
> confirm, please, that I've understood things correctly ?
>
> My understanding #1: Hardy won't receive any new "simple" patch if it is
> not related to a high impact bug.

The impact of the bug is weighed against the potential for regression,
but generally only serious bugs will get fixed.

> My understanding #2: Same things stand for Intrepid, Jaunty and Karmic.
>
> My understanding #3: Ubuntu hackers (like James Westby) have already a
> lot of work and cannot cope with supplementary tasks like doing more
> fixes than authorized by the policy pointed earlier
> (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates)

Well, we can't fix anything that doesn't follow the policy, regardless
of how busy or not we are.

> My understanding #4: This policy uses the safety standpoint as an
> official argument not to allow you to maintain a high quality level for
> a release version like the Hardy LTS one.
>
> My understanding #5: Distributions like Debian have already managed to
> fix this bug (which is not related to a high impact flaw) because they
> do not have that policy.

Debian didn't fix it in any stable release, as it never affected their
stable release. Ubuntu did the same in fixing it in the development
release.

> My understanding #6: LTS means Long Term Support for High Impact
> Problems (HIPs) only, not Other Annoying Flaws (OAFs).

LTS means security updates for longer, as well as some fixing of bugs
for longer. I doesn't mean that every problem will be fixed, no.

> My understanding #7: This bug (#86685) is not a high impact bug.

I think it is worthy of a SRU.

Thanks,

James