On 7/11/2011 5:35 PM, Stefan Fritsch wrote: > On Monday 11 July 2011, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote: >> On 7/10/2011 5:34 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote: >>> Regardless of anyone else's opinion, the addition or deletion of >>> a new API to our product is a technical change that can be >>> vetoed. Likewise, the API being an incomplete abstraction that >>> isn't needed in httpd is a valid technical reason to veto it >>> even if it had once been in apr-util. >>> >>> Other than the convoluted history of this particular argument, >>> I don't see any reason for further frustration. Revert the >>> commit. >> >> I believe svn rm ... svn cp -r of the origin files to jump across >> the rejected patches is the most efficient and least confusing >> revert? > > Because of the other changes that we want to preserver, I think doing > one big revert commit may be easier.
I will sandbox the state of trunk before committing, the files can always be svn cp'ed from sandbox to trunk when and if agreed upon. >> The only complexity is to ensure configure.in/ or other peripheral >> changes are not lost. I have the cycles do this Tuesday, if not >> Monday. > > With a bit of git-foo, I have produced this: > > http://people.apache.org/~sf/revert_ldap.diff > > Which should be the combined revert of > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1143225 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1143222 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1143221 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1141203 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1141201 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1140075 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1140069 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1130186 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1131393 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1129956 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1129891 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1129886 > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1129808 Sorry, I don't see applying a mega-revert. Either piecemeal or wholesale svn cp's from pre-1129808 seems more sensible. The later is more legible in svn, because re-applying the commits with proper attribution would be messy.