Thanks!
> Other (non-blocking) comments:
>
> The entry in debian/changelog for 1.6.9.0 seems to lack everything
> that can be found in the 1.6.7.0 and 1.6.8.0 upstream changelog
> sections, that hence don't appear anywhere in d/changelog, since these
> two versions were not packaged. Perhaps changing debian/README.source
> to use git-dch instead of plain dch would avoid such mistakes in
> the future.
I actually used dit-dch, but then I cleaned the changelog by removing
the entries generated for following not-very-interesting commits:
1e1210f Merge remote-tracking branch 'gk/bug_9901_v5'
4a9d180 Changelog and version bump for 1.6.7.0.
a9a3b8f Merge remote-tracking branch 'brade/bug10398'
0bd903f Write changelog and bump version for 1.6.8.0.
453ef7f Update changelog and rdf for 1.6.9.0.
In the future, would you prefer that I keep even such uninformative entries?
> Regarding the version/Tor check, this is getting complicated enough
> that a few lines explaining the whole thing in the design doc would
> seem appropriate to me. I suspect the messages for the commits you've
> mentioned in the merge request should be good basis for such text.
> I think we're slowly, but consistently accumulating "technical debt"
> by under-documenting how our browser is configured. OTOH, this is
> a process I should probably have started myself back when committing
> 3241197, so it would certainly not be fair to put the burden of
> documenting this all now on your shoulders. Care to file a ticket
> about it, referencing the commits you mentioned?
