On Wed, 6 Jun 2012, Jed Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 3:03 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > Check the old email. Satish and Matt had specific concerns. > > > > Matt's last email said > > """ > Okay, it seems like I can do everything I want to do. I vote we push it and > wait for > the breakage. However, can we wait to push it until Apr 1? I have a > conference > scheduled which will heavily use petsc-dev. > """ > > Satish's complaint had something to do with "hg pull -u" versus "hg pull; > hg update" in 1.8.1 versus later versions, though it seems that the only > difference there was in .hg/dirstate which seemed inconsequential.
Hm - I thought the issue was more about 'working files' in buildsystem getting updated or not - in which case users would still have broken configure runs even with subrepos - like what we currently have. So what is the current recommondation with subrepos? Which minimum version for petsc users, and which minimum version for petsc-developers? Satish > > > Is there still a blocking reason not to use subrepos? >
