bug#60467: 30.0.50; primitive-undo: Changes to be undone by function different from announced

[Gregory Heytings]

> > Well, I hope this tricky code will be replaced by the non-tricky code I 
> > proposed, in which none of these obscurities exist... ;-)
>
> My hope is that we can just remove the timestamp special case, in which 
> case we can keep the current code mostly unchanged.

Then our hopes are different.  What's wrong exactly with replacing a piece 
of code that requires a long discussion with question marks everywhere to 
be understood by a piece of well-documented code that is much more 
readable and "evidently" does what it is supposed to do?