[Aptitude-devel] Reverting my commits

[Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo]

2014/1/24 Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>:
> Hi,
>
> For the record, I commited this because I had picked it from some of
> the branches (wip-cmdline or experimental), originally commited by
> you.
>
> Now, Daniel, I would appreciate if you discuss it with me before
> deleting more of my commits.
>
>
> http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=aptitude/aptitude.git;a=commitdiff;h=42d3f65e74f7db85e49f95c0dc3b498ff1aca9e0


This is the original commit that I picked from, btw:

  http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=aptitude/aptitude.git;a=commitdiff;h=c8a2b86fe96eec2356733868558b4133a38eabd0

----------------------------
commit c8a2b86fe96eec2356733868558b4133a38eabd0
Author: Daniel Hartwig <mandyke at gmail.com>
Date:   Fri Jun 29 17:44:51 2012 +0800

    Remove newline from error message

diff --git a/src/cmdline/cmdline_extract_cache_subset.cc
b/src/cmdline/cmdline_extract_cache_subset.cc
index dde531a..75f4c4f 100644
--- a/src/cmdline/cmdline_extract_cache_subset.cc
+++ b/src/cmdline/cmdline_extract_cache_subset.cc
@@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ namespace aptitude
       if(argc < 2)
        {
           _error->Error(_("extract-cache-entries: at least one argument is"
-                          " required (the directory\nto which to
write files)"));
+                          " required (the directory to which to write
files)"));
           return 100;
        }

--------------------------------

I don't have special interest in having it in master, you had commited
after all, and it is true that it was from experimental, so for me it
can remain reverted.

I was trying to go through these branches to try to include
non-disruptive commits not yet uploaded to Debian, to not waste job
that had been done (mostly by Daniel Hartwig).

In this first phase I only picked patches which seemed OK without
being too disruptive, hoping that they would be a good idea and not
controversial. The most disruptive changes would need more careful
consideration and, if possible to integrate them at all (maybe they
are incomplete, or need to be adapted to recent changes in libapt,
etc), I was leaving those for 0.6.10 or 0.7, something "post 0.6.9", a
few months down the line.

Some of these patches from other branches I cherry-picked with the git
command so they maintained attribution, not others, because they were
causing conflicts in NEWS and things like that; so in those cases I
included them by hand.  They were small enough as to not make sense in
terms of copyright attribution, and there were only 2 or 3.


Cheers.
-- 
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo at gmail.com>