Philipp thinks, the fact that rng is not using the information in /usr/share/bug renders rng "unfit for release" and upgraded the corresponding bugreport from wishlist to serious. Moreover: since I dared to downgrade the report back to wishlist he decided to remove rng from testing and block it until the bug is fixed.
I don't want to heat the debate about this bug again, but Philipp's decision seems arbitrary for me and I wonder if the same standard is applied to every other Debian package. I mean, rng has no release critical defects. It just does not use the aforementioned scripts as additional information in bugreports -- does this really render the software "unfit for release"? For example: In Etch we shipped a famous email client with a known bug which lead reproducibly to loss of emails on IMAP accounts, just because removing the program, or one of it's components was not possible in the remaining time.