On Sun, 2019-10-27 at 20:29 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > If you modify the upstream source, then by definition you do not have > reproducibility of the upstream source, and you're now talking about > something else (review of the changes, which I called audit in my > previous message). I think I'm guilty of a poor choice of words. > I have no idea how you got that from my previous messages, but you > have misunderstood. Excellent. > This is exactly my objection to reducing everything to patches rather > than using the power of Git to represent the history and structure of > the changes made for Debian. Personally I don't see the "power of git" adds much apart from history, but really it doesn't matter for this discussion. > am completely baffled by your belief that this is inherently easier > to do with quilt than with Git. I don't believe that. I guess we are talking past each other. Out of curiosity do you do maintain the changsets manually in git, or use something like gquilt?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part