Re: Which repo SVN or GIT?

They are not in sync.

[blake@i9-tower abcl.svn]$ svn update
Updating '.':
At revision 15575.
[blake@i9-tower abcl.svn]$ svn log |head
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r15572 | mevenson | 2022-04-07 06:58:33 -0500 (Thu, 07 Apr 2022) | 3 lines

doc: update non-resolving reference to Rhode's extensible sequences

(Jonathan Cunningham)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r15571 | mevenson | 2022-04-06 16:26:55 -0500 (Wed, 06 Apr 2022) | 1 line

Update to javaparser 3.24.2. Fix tests. Fix typo: ignoreable -> ignorable.
Have invoke load javaparser first time #1 is used.
[blake@i9-tower abcl.svn]$

---------

[blake@i9-tower abcl.git]$ git pull
Already up to date.
[blake@i9-tower abcl.git]$ git log |head
commit f60ba2b9bc361689cbfdfaf2072d9a19fab4b8fe
Merge: 933fbb13 e0bfbadd
Author: Alan Ruttenberg <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue Apr 12 15:20:54 2022 +0000

    Merge pull request #483 from alanruttenberg/patch-javaparser-huh

    getField->getName bugfix for javaparser

commit e0bfbadd9d72a710b329ad8e7bab9ba48e6aeea3
[blake@i9-tower abcl.git]$ git log |head -20
commit f60ba2b9bc361689cbfdfaf2072d9a19fab4b8fe
Merge: 933fbb13 e0bfbadd
Author: Alan Ruttenberg <[email protected]>
Date:   Tue Apr 12 15:20:54 2022 +0000

    Merge pull request #483 from alanruttenberg/patch-javaparser-huh

    getField->getName bugfix for javaparser

commit e0bfbadd9d72a710b329ad8e7bab9ba48e6aeea3
Author: Alan Ruttenberg <[email protected]>
Date:   Sun Apr 10 23:12:16 2022 -0400

    getField->getName Must be a change from updated javaparser. No idea how
this worked with the patch I submitted

commit 933fbb137a6e6ddf9f72fd29ac8bb02897d02da7
Author: Mark Evenson <[email protected]>
Date:   Thu Apr 7 12:53:34 2022 +0100

    doc: update non-resolving reference to Rhode's extensible sequences
[blake@i9-tower abcl.git]$



On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 7:02 AM Mark Evenson <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> > On Apr 30, 2022, at 11:50, Blake McBride <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > I am pretty sure we are keeping two parallel repos for ABCL, one in
> subversion and the other in GIT.  I thought two things:
> >
> > 1. They were kept in sync
> > 2. The subversion repo was preferred
>
> There is no preferred repository:  a sizable number of contributions have
> come in through the github.com interfaces.  The Subversion trunk provides
> the linear view of the Git DAG.
>
> >
> > I recently compared the two repos and discovered that:
> >
> > 1.  They are not in sync
> > 2.  The GIT repo has the latest changes
>
> They should be in sync: you will need to provide specific references if
> you find this not to be the case.  If they aren’t in sync, I will bring
> them in sync.
>
> >
> > Personally, I prefer subversion.  However, I feel strongly that we
> should drop one of the repos so that this out-of-sync situation no longer
> arises.
>
> We will be maintaining the current three repository (two Git, one
> Subversion) bridge by my idiosyncratic Mercurial bridge as long as I am
> doing the release engineering.
>
> --
> "A screaming comes across the sky.  It has happened before but there is
> nothing
> to compare to it now."
>
>
>
>
>
>