Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] git-what: explain what to do next

From: Jon Loeliger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 09:56:05 -0500

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Christian Couder <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
>> It seems not very friendly to just "return 1" when not bisecting.
>> And before my last patch to use BISECT_START to check if we are bisecting, 
>> it would perhaps have been better to use 'test -f "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_NAMES"'.
> 
> The reason for this silence is because Santi wants to call potential
> culprits in turn and stop when one responds "Yeah, I am the guilty one who
> threw a monkey wrench into the user's workflow".  For that to work, "No,
> the user is not in the middle of any interaction with me" response needs
> to be silent.

Hrm.  Do both?  Have the normal interactive user command
be more verbose, but let the pseudo-scripted version supply
an additional --status-only flag as it sequences through
the status checks?

jdl