On Thu, 9 Feb 2012, Matthew Knepley wrote:

On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Satish Balay <[email protected]> wrote:

...

On Wed, 8 Feb 2012, Sean Farley wrote:

...

...

Hell, if you *really* want to, just create the account:

petsc-release(s)

...

then the URL would be

http://bitbucket.org/petsc-release/petsc-3.1

Actually, it's even easier than that:

https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc-dev/downloads

which provides downloads for all taged changesets.

tags are no good. we implrement branches in different clones.

I am not sure what you mean by this. Let me be explicit.

This organization is semantic, and Completely outside the version control structure. I want something to tell me "this repo is about simulating rockets" like Kit, the voice in Michael's car. Tags are fine for this. So is a hierarchy. So is silly XML metadata.

I interpreted sean as suggesting using 'hg tags' to organize relase patches and dev changes in a single repo. And instead of using seprate clones for releases as we do now - redo the work flow with 'hg tags' To me its not easy to implement branches with tags - hence the above statement. [either you have named branches or you let the repo have multiple heads - and keep tagging the release head and workarround the confusion during merges etc. I'd rather deal with these issues in separate clones for release/dev] satish