Severity levels

Ben Klein shacklein at
Sat May 2 20:08:05 CDT 2009

I really didn't think this one deserved even my comment, but here goes.

2009/5/3 Austin English <austinenglish at>:
> 2009/5/1 Nicklas Börjesson <Nicklas.Borjesson at>:
>> Current severity levels are perfect for server applications where everything is simply about functionality working or not working.
>> However, the overwhelming majority of windows applications in general, and those being ported through wine in particular are GUI-based, end-user applications.
>> When it comes to these kinds of applications, in front of which actual people sit for hours on end doing actual work, other factors come into play.
> Wine is meant to support _ALL_ windows applications. It doesn't give
> priority to 'server' or 'desktop' applications (there is no
> difference, really), but instead tries to make all of them work.
> I have a feeling that by 'server' applications, you meant to say 'old
> crappy business applications', or something similar, which makes a bit
> of sense. Those applications are simple, and don't depend on a large
> portion of the Win32 API, which makes them easy to get running.

I have a feeling that by "server" applications, he meant stuff that's
not Wine. For me, games and regular applications running in Wine is
still "simply about functionality working or not working". It's still
a matter of determining how much a bug affects the functionality,
whether that's gameplay, graphics, HID responsiveness ...

2009/5/3 Austin English <austinenglish at>:
> 2009/5/2 Nicklas Börjesson <Nicklas.Borjesson at>:
>> Not applications, issues.
>> My point is that user experience issues gets a lower severity than they should.
>> Let's take photoshop CS 4 with two old but relevant actual issues as an example.
>> 1. There is a problem with the text tool functionality, it did not work. Everything else works, though.

"Text tool" is one tool out of many. "Minor" loss of functionality.
"Normal" at worst.

>> 2. There are serious graphics problems, huge artifacts, the entire application is almost unworkable under Gnome.

If it's restricted to a small number of applications, "Normal". If
it's a reasonably large number, "Major". Regardless of what you might
think, it's not JUST a "UI glitch" if it seriously impairs
functionality. Even the use of the word "serious" in your description
implies it's more than a "Minor" bug.

>> With the current severity levels(without common sense), example 1 gets higher priority, which I think is wrong.

Without common sense, all bug reports would be "Enhancement" requests,
or "Critical", depending on how arrogant the reporter is. Common sense
must *always* be applied.

> The problem is, however, that many of those problems only break an
> application or two. What is a blocker for Photoshop isn't a blocker
> for World of Warcraft or Microsoft Office, for example.

Hence the bug is "Normal" and not "Major".

> Please bottom post on wine mailing lists.

Oh, and use "Reply to all" so you stop just hitting Austin with responses!

2009/5/3 Rosanne DiMesio <dimesio at>:
> On Sat, 2 May 2009 21:08:23 +0200
> Nicklas Börjesson <Nicklas.Borjesson at> wrote:
>> Non-technical? Posting on and following the wine-devel list? Severity levels perfectly clear?
>> I must say, you've got some serious credibility issues.. :-)

Rosanne is an AppDB admin. What contribution have you made to Wine?
Out of you and her, I don't think her credibility can be called in to
question. And before you ask, I'm also an AppDB admin, I package the
Debian packages for WineHQ, and have had a patch committed to Wine.
I'll even send you the git revision code if you can't find it! :D

Note that like Rosanne, even when I was a newbie submitting bug
reports, I understood the severity levels because I read the
descriptions. The descriptions are fine as is, with the possible
exception of "Blocker" (people submit "Blocker" bugs for "Normal"
issues because it blocks the thing that they're doing).

More information about the wine-devel mailing list