On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 22:19, Barry Smith <bsmith@mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

dft Density Functional Theory solver for Ion Channels petsc-maint@mcs.anl.gov Thu, 28 Jul 2011 15:05:00 -0600 gz RSS Atom
dft-fft unknown unknown Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:49:50 -0600 RSS Atom
dft-log Density Functional Theory solver for Ion Channels in Logarithmic Variables petsc-maint@mcs.anl.gov Tue, 14 Oct 2008 09:31:52 -0600 gz RSS Atom
dft-mg Density Functional Theory solver for Ion Channels with Grid Sequencing petsc-maint@mcs.anl.gov Fri, 28 Nov 2008 13:15:07 -0600 gz RSS Atom
dft-rfd Density Functional Theory solver for Ion Channels with Advanced Electrostatics petsc-maint@mcs.anl.gov Thu, 22 Dec 2011 13:56:52 -0600

If you name it dft/log instead, then when you clone it, you get a directory called "log".

Come on guys, it is completely moronic that bitbucket doesn't support subdirectories to hold repositories. No amount of rationalization can provide a reason for this absurdity.

Some of Jed's rationalizations are going off the deep end.

* In order to not have a Releases directory he states: "I think separate clones for every release is clutter."

I think we should get rid of this thing called libraries? Who wants to share code anyway. We should just copy the source code of libc (and MPI, etc) into our packages. Since we won't be modifying the upstream source, it'll be easy to copy in a new version when they release one.

Okay, I'm being silly now, but why do you want a sequence of separate clones, each of which is a strict subset of the last?