On Sat March 1 2008 21:09:27 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > So, every change in dpkg code is *always* completely obvious, and you never > need any extra information that is not in a comment? > > Really?
If some dpkg team members cannot be trusted to comment their code, then they cannot be trusted to log their changes. (Note that this is not an assertion as to the trustworthiness or otherwise of any or all dpkg team members.) You've rattled on at great length without showing any value to git logs beyond providing clues to a successor developer where a predecessor falls under a bus part way through developing a feature. I would argue that even in such cases a better form of insurance would be a design specification, and that if a design specification is not warranted then the feature is trivial and it's better to discard the partially implemented trivial feature and have the new developer restart development of the trivial new feature from scratch. --Mike Bird -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
