I feel the need to post about this issue in the hope that similar problems can be avoided in the future.
My initial disclaimer is that I'm not a package maintainer for any of the major distros, so I'm not intimately familiar with the stresses or workloads that they may face everyday. I am, though, the lead developer on a project that I hope one day will be included in major distros.
Whenever I get some interest from potential distro maintainers, I try to stress my keen interest in getting any downstream patches. This is to hopefully lighten their workload as well as to improve the software for everyone.
Unfortunately, it appears to me that the patch that caused the trouble in Debian recently was not fed back to the upstream developers, and if it had, it may have been caught much earlier.
What can be done from an upstream developer's point of view to encourage these upstream patches to keep flowing?
And is it not almost a duty for all downstream package maintainers to send patches upstream whenever possible?
Perhaps in some cases, the upstream packages themselves are not actively maintained, in which case being a distro package maintainer is even harder. But OpenSSL is not such a case.
I've run into 3 cases so far where a bad patch to the libtar library has sneaked into various distros and caused trouble for people trying to compile Barry on their systems. Would it not be better for these distro-specific patches to be fed upstream, and get rejected with a proper reason? Would it not be better for all distro maintainers of a particular package to be subscribed to its development mailing list, and see these issues first hand?
Obviously I think so, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on it. I think it is an issue that needs to be discussed, and now's the perfect time.