[OSM-dev] Implementing 'undo' in Potlatch

[Brett Henderson]

Tom Hughes wrote:
> I'm very much inclined to say (b) and I suspect Steve will as well.
>
> The general rule is that we don't delete things at all...
>
> Basically what I believe you should do is exactly what would happen if
> the user manually changed the way back to the previous configuration, so
> you just put the old version back in the current tables (with a new
> timestamp of course) and insert a copy into the history tables as normal.
>
> If you revert something in CVS or subversion you don't lose the history
> of it, you just get a new revision that happens to be the reverse of the
> one you were undoing.
>
> Tom
>   
I'm putting in a vote for (b).  The Osmosis replication (that I'll 
finish one of these days) searches for new records to generate change 
sets.  It won't notice deleted records because there is no way of 
detecting them looking at the current state of the database.