"Eugene V. Lyubimkin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I failed to fetch a human-readable patch info for psi in testing from > patch-tracking.debian.net, for example.
Okay, take another example then: http://patch-tracking.debian.net/package/ffmpeg-debian When looking at the individual patches, you see a pretty precise comment at the top of each patch why this patch was introduced with references to the discussions that lead to creation of that patch. > Also, it would be better to combine several patch into one > user-visible change in some cases, some patches may not be not > "listed" at all; typos' fixes in documentation are good, but not too > serious changes to end users, for example. I think it is rather hard to draw a line here, because it very much depends on the POV of the user. End-users are likely not interested in the source of a program, they want to use it. (Prospective) Maintainers and upstreams of the package are interested in seeing all patches anyways. What kind of users would be interested only in "end-user visible" changes and is it worth the efford of the maintainer to decide on this? BTH, I think the maintainer's time is way better spend with documententing their patches properly. -- Gruesse/greetings, Reinhard Tartler, KeyID 945348A4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
