per-topic or per-file patches (was: pkgquilt)
Edgar Fuß <[email protected]> Sun, 14 Jun 2026 19:18:04 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.os.netbsd.devel.packages |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> Personally, I am very happy that the current standard is to have exactly one > patch file per file, named after the file it patches. I am against the sort > of per-topic patches that you describe, because it makes it so much more > difficult to rebase when you update the package to a new version. In my opinion, per-topic patches would much better match the "please upstream patches" rule. Patches fixing bashisms, Linuxisms etc. are often spread across several files. Sometimes, patches to one file fix different things that ought to be upstreamed as seperate issues. Upstream may release with one issue fixed and others not. Othoh, upstream patches (like fixes/enhancements not yet incorporated into a release) may also spread across different files (and not be available as a downloadable patch).