David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 08:56:01PM -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
>> David T. Lewis wrote:
>>
>>> I consider these changes somewhat risky, so I would appreciate if anyone can
>>> review them and speak up if they cause problems. In particular, the methods
>>> Project>>enterForEmergencyRecovery and Project>>enter:revert:saveForRevert:
>>> could stand a good review.
>> I think we should nuke enterForEmergencyRecovery and those parts in 
>> Project that deal with isolated changes. This is one of the projects 
>> that never got to a conclusion and there is no point in keeping all 
>> these hooks for stuff that is unused. If you want to keep the interface, 
>> just raise an error if you ever see a revert == true or so.
> 
> Oh, good, that explains it. I was rather nervous about modifying a method
> when I did not even know what it was being used for.

It was used in an experimental project that tried to isolate changes 
done in a project by un-applying them when you would enter another 
project. Unfortunately, the approach taken (making copies of the methods 
and applying/unapplying them when entering leaving projects) was fraught 
with perils and didn't work very well in practice. So nuke it ;-)

Cheers,
   - Andreas