On Tue, Jun 17, 2003 at 07:01:56AM +0000, Matthias Scheler wrote:
> In article <20030614131925.GB2519@antioche.eu.org>,
> 	Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org> writes:
> > Well, if you have a machine that used to boot, and no longer does because of
> > a change in the OS, HIGH/CRITICAL is probably OK.
> 
> No, it is *not. This is NetBSD-current, breakage is too be expected. You
> must always be prepared to boot an older kernel if the new one doesn't
> work on your system.
> 
> "High" and "Critical" are only justified for remotely exploitable
> security holes or serious data corruption.

We should have a clear definition of these then.
IMHO such a regression should be quickly handled, before other changes
make it harder to fix or the change is pulled up to stable branches.
Because of this, marking them as High is good from an engineering POW
(maybe critical can be reserved for security problems).

-- 
Manuel Bouyer <bouyer@antioche.eu.org>
     NetBSD: 24 ans d'experience feront toujours la difference
--