[Gnu-arch-users] Help -- how do I get Tom Lord's latest compilable DEVELOPMENT version of arch/tla?

[David A. Wheeler]

Hi - I've read everything on the GNU site, and everything
on the wiki site, but I haven't been able to answer what
I _think_ is a simple question.

Question: What should I download/tag to get the
LATEST development version of Tom Lord's tla (his "1.3" branch)?
I want to start with Tom Lord's current branch, and then mirror my 
modifications,
with the hope that he'll add my mods to his (mainline) version of tla.
But I'm not sure exactly what I'm supposed to tag.

I did a:
 tla tag address@hidden/tla--devo--1.3 tla--dwheeler--1.3
 but this doesn't bring down enough to even compile
 (I can't run ./configure for example).   I can staple together
 this material with the tla 1.2 release tarfile to produce something
 that actually compiles; in fact I've done that and created a small patch.
 But I don't want to continue doing this; I fear sooner
 or later that's going to screw things up.  Besides, that kind of
 stapling is exactly what an SCM tool shouldn't need.  The "1.3" value
 clearly shows me that there _IS_ a 1.3 branch, though.

I also did a:
 tla tag address@hidden/dists--devo--1.0 dists--dwheeler--1.0
 But it's not at ALL clear to me that this is the
 current development branch.  In fact, there's no top-level "src"
 directory at all; this is some sort of master configuration.
 The docs on configurations are a little weak, so I'm
 not sure how to deal with this.  But I certainly don't have
 a top-level "src" directory to work with; that I know!

Finally:
 tla abrowse address@hidden
 didn't suggest any obvious alternatives to me.

I must be doing something wrong.
I was expecting to type a single command to get the
current development state (the equivalent of getting a CVS HEAD),
and even after creating a branch, tagging various alternatives, and getting,
what I'm doing isn't placing me in that enlightened state.
Please help me move one step toward enlightenment :-).

Sorry to ask what must be an obvious answer to others, but it's
frustrating to me.  I've somehow skipped past
what's obvious to everyone else :-(.

--- David A. Wheeler <address@hidden>