httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>
Subject Re: [vote] mod_ldap
Date Tue, 12 Jul 2011 04:02:14 GMT
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.


Mime
View raw message