Comment 6 for bug 842695

Sorry for the delay :-/

> Is this expectation understandable? Do you agree with it? Do you think it can be made to work?

Yes, yes and yes, but I expect the amount of work to be significant.

Also, the log for changes in a dir is not well defined and there have been
discussions in the past about whether a file that was included in a dir at
one point but then moved elsewhere should still be considered part of the
dir for example.

But here, the '200' is clearly an implementation detail leading to a bug in
what is displayed to the user and as such, should be fixed.

Regarding the points you raised about ORIGINAL/INHERITED, I think this needs to be discussed on the list rather than on the bug (even if it's nice to have your summary here, the discussion deserves a better exposure).