On Jun 6, 2012, at 4:24 PM, Jed Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > What if it is some great fundamental improvement to BuildSystem (like > removing 70% of the code and making the rest a million times better)? We in > petsc-dev don't benefit from that? That is freaking insane and stupid! Of > course we want all updates to BuildSystem otherwise there are essentially two > different repositories evolving over time with different things in each one. > That is freaking insane! Who designed this stupid subrepo shit? It is > completely garbage if what you say is true. > > It's really simple, you commit to petsc-dev after the cool stuff goes into > BuildSystem.
"you commit to petsc-dev " Show me the EXACT syntax you use to "commit to petsc-dev" and I'll show you something stupid that no one will use. Barry > > It's a small price to pay for being able to go back to a consistent state and > not needing to remember to update BuildSystem.
