Russell Stuart <russell-deb...@stuart.id.au> writes: > Harking back to the time we removed the randomness generator from > openssl, it's very nice to have a single patch say "it was removed > because it wasn't exercised in the tests. upstream didn't respond to > requests for comment" rather than having it interspersed with the 650 > odd other lines of other changes we carry with no explanation.
Git neither hurts nor helps that. quilt neither hurts nor helps that. This is a request for package maintainers to record changes as clear, separable, single-topic changes with clear documentation, something that's possible with all of these tools and possible to fail to do with all of these tools. I completely agree with you (well, for most packages; in some cases, we've effectively forked the package and attempting to trace changes back to some ancient upstream release is not useful, but that's a separate problem), but it's orthogonal to this thread, and it's confusing to raise this point here as if anyone in this thread is arguing against this. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <https://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
