>>> I realise I'm the guy who touched this last, but it looks completely
>>> wrong. I mean, the new name's an improvement. But we revert the most
>>> recent submission, and then say that we reverted the _new_ most recent
>>> submission... which was surely the _second_ most recent submission?!
>>
>> I don't think so.  A installation of any method, whether by save or
>> revert, makes it the most-recent submission, irregardless of its prior
>> position / existence in the list.
>
> That's my point. Given submissions in order of a, b, c the most recent is c. We revert that, and then ask what the most recent submission is, to display to the user. But most recent now means b!

It sounds like you're thinking that "most-recent submission" means
"the one with the latest timestamp" but that is not the case.
Timestamps do not come into play at all w.r.t. recent submissions.
It's simply the order of installations of methods, whether the method
is from 2013 or 2002.

The only scenario I can think of that matches your description would
be if "c" was a brand-new method addition, and revertMostRecent would
therefore cause it to be deleted.