On Dec 26, 2019, Joseph Myers <j...@polyomino.org.uk> wrote: > We should ensure we don't have missing branches in the first place (for > whatever definition of what branches we should have).
*nod* > Adding a branch after the fact is a fundamentally different kind of > operation That depends on the used tool. A reproducible one, or at least one that aimed at stability across multiple conversions, could make this easier, but I guess reposurgeon is not such a tool. Which suggests to me we have to be even more reassured of the correctness of its moving-target output before we adopt it, unlike other conversion tools that have long had a certain stability of output built into their design. I understand you're on it, and I thank you for undertaking much of that validation and verification work. Your well-known attention to detail is very valuable. -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter he/him https://FSFLA.org/blogs/lxo Free Software Evangelist Stallman was right, but he's left :( GNU Toolchain Engineer FSMatrix: It was he who freed the first of us FSF & FSFLA board member The Savior shall return (true);
