On Fri, 28 Jun 2013, Jed Brown wrote: > Satish Balay <ba...@mcs.anl.gov> writes: > > > With such extra metadata - one could potentially do such tarcking of > > updates with tarballs aswell. > > For that, you'd have to have positive identification for a tarball > version (perhaps its SHA1) and keep the association with the working > tree.
This can be encoded into the url. [since we host the tarballs anyway] Satish > > > But for what Barry wants - we need subrepo type support where we keep track > > of > > snapshot relations at each step of progress of petsc-dev & moab-dev. > > > > As it stands now - if you checkout petsc-dev from a few weeks back [or > > working on a branch for that long] - you get latest moab that could > > potentially have conflicts. > > That is the reason for 'gitcommit' referring to a specific commit. >
