On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 15:03, Richard Earnshaw (lists) wrote: > I wouldn't bother with that. There are known defects in the version of > reposurgeon that I used to produce that which have since been fixed. It > was *never* the point of that upload to ask for correctness checks on > the conversion (I said so at the time). Instead it was intended to > demonstrate the improvements to the commit summaries that I think we can > make.
My concern is that there is no conversion done using reposurgeon that *can* be used to do correctness checks.
