On 13-12-2019 14:24:33 -0500, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 12/13/19 9:28 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote: > > > > We are providing those patches, maybe. In reality very often the > > patches originate from somewhere else though. And you don't want to > > have to respin all of those just because. At least that's what I feel. > > > > Just because... the context changed? A new "!" in a line of context can > be the difference between letting someone log in with the right password > and letting them log in with the wrong password. You should at least > have to stop and verify that the patch does what you think it does when > it "gains" fuzz. And at that point, git diff will give you a clean > version of it.
Counter argument is that we've been doing this for decades, and always relied on maintainers to check the contents of their patches, without problems. We didn't introduce a predictable random number generator or something. Your very specific example just illustrates the niche this proposal is targetting. As with many of the proposals lately, they just seem to aim at more work for individual maintainers, with a very low gain ratio. Better, allow this to be a FEATURE, or whatever, that devs should enable, but don't spit this in the user's face by default. Thanks, Fabian -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
