per-topic or per-file patches (was: pkgquilt)

[Edgar Fuß <ef%math.uni-bonn.de@localhost>]

> 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).