Tracking important issues

Kurt Roeckx kurt at
Sun Oct 4 14:22:09 UTC 2020

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 08:51:28PM +0200, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Hi,
> I would like to have a system so that we can tag issues as
> important. But I think they fall in a few categories:
> - Features for the next minor/major release (so 3.1 or 4.0)
>   that we find important. I've created a new milestone for that:
> (Post 3.0.0)
>   We've also had a Post 1.1.1 milestone, but that seems to be just
>   things that didn't block the 1.1.1 release, maybe some more
>   things can be moved over.
>   I suggest we do not add all feature requests to the new
>   milestone, so that we can have some kind of overview.
> - Features we want in before beta 1: The 3.0.0 beta1 milestone
> - Bugs that need to get fixed before the 3.0.0 release: 
>   currently using the 3.0.0 milestone
> - Important bugs that affect the stable releases. I've started
>   tagging bugs that have "triaged: bug" also with the branches
>   that are affected. But that doesn't say how important it is.
>   I have 2 proposals for that:
>   - Create a milestone for them, like 1.1.1-stable. In cases we
>     have multiple supported branches, we can add for instance a
>     3.0-stable and use the oldest branches that's a affected
>     as the target. This would at least match what we do now
>     with the "3.0.0" milestone.
>   - Create a label for the severity. I'm not sure we need things
>     like "severity: minor", but it might be useful too.

So I've created the "severity: important" label, and started
tagging some issues with it.


More information about the openssl-project mailing list