<p>It's probably an artifact of the migration from Sourceforge to Github. Sourceforge uses the SVN version control system while Github uses Git so moving from one to the other might leave behind some weirdness.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-18T20:08:55.627Z
2023-08-18T20:08:55.627Z
Ava Chow
<p>Satoshi added the 1MB block size limit in this commit on 15 July 2010</p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a30b56ebe76ffff9f9cc8a6667186179413c6349" rel="noreferrer">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a30b56ebe76ffff9f9cc8a6667186179413c6349</a></p>
</li>
<li><p><a href="https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/code/103" rel="noreferrer">https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/code/103</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>Why did Andresen make an identical commit on 19 Jul 2010?</p>
<ul>
<li><a href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/9d2174b6f5f3fac2463c7ebc2dbb9004b3740d23" rel="noreferrer">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/9d2174b6f5f3fac2463c7ebc2dbb9004b3740d23</a></li>
</ul>
<p>I realise it was enforced in a later commit via UASF, but the question remains, why are there two identical commits? Have I misunderstood the workflow? Did Andresen make changes when transitioning from SourceForge to GitHub in 2011?</p>
<p>TLDR: What is the purpose of two identical commits with different dates in the GitHub history?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-09-09T02:02:37.817Z
It's probably an artifact of the migration from Sourceforge to Github. Sourceforge uses the SVN version control system while Github uses Git so moving from one to the other might leave behind some weirdness.
Ava Chow
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-18T17:00:03.883Z
Would you mind posting that as an answer, @AndrewChow?
Murch
<bitcoin-core-development><history><blocksize>
Satoshi introduced the 1MB block size limit in a commit. Why did Andresen make an identical commit some days later?
Aman Saggu
# Satoshi introduced the 1MB block size limit in a commit. Why did Andresen make an identical commit some days later?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-09-08)

Satoshi added the 1MB block size limit in this commit on 15 July 2010

* <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/a30b56ebe76ffff9f9cc8a6667186179413c6349>
* <https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/code/103>

Why did Andresen make an identical commit on 19 Jul 2010?

* <https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/commit/9d2174b6f5f3fac2463c7ebc2dbb9004b3740d23>

I realise it was enforced in a later commit via UASF, but the question remains, why are there two identical commits? Have I misunderstood the workflow? Did Andresen make changes when transitioning from SourceForge to GitHub in 2011?

TLDR: What is the purpose of two identical commits with different dates in the GitHub history?

**Tags:** bitcoin-core-development, history, blocksize

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: It's probably an artifact of the migration from Sourceforge to Github. Sourceforge uses the SVN version control system while Github uses Git so moving from one to the other might leave behind some weirdness.  
> **username_2**: Would you mind posting that as an answer, @AndrewChow?  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2023-08-18. Score: 2

It's probably an artifact of the migration from Sourceforge to Github. Sourceforge uses the SVN version control system while Github uses Git so moving from one to the other might leave behind some weirdness.


---

