From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily•org>
Cc: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail•com>,
git@vger•kernel.org, j6t@kdbg•org, jnareb@gmail•com,
jrnieder@gmail•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 1/7] bisect: move argument parsing before state modification.
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 04:29:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vobyw4mkv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201109070816.16655.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> (Christian Couder's message of "Wed, 7 Sep 2011 08:16:15 +0200")
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily•org> writes:
> If we start bisecting like this:
>
> $ git bisect start HEAD HEAD~20
>
> and then we decide that it was not optimum and we want to start again like
> this:
>
> $ git bisect start HEAD HEAD~6
>
> then issuing the latter command might not work as it did before this patch.
I didn't even know the above was supposed to work. It may have worked, but
I think it was not by design but merely by accident. Besides, wouldn't it
be the same to say "git bisect good" to further limit the suspect range,
instead of giving the second, seemingly nested, "bisect start" that is not
really nesting, which only confuses the users?
Having said that, if you can resurrect the old behaviour without too much
code churn, I wouldn't mind to look at the patch, but I am not sure if it
is worth it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-07 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-04 12:00 [PATCH v17 0/7] bisect: Add support for --no-checkout option Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:00 ` [PATCH v17 1/7] bisect: move argument parsing before state modification Jon Seymour
2011-09-07 6:16 ` Christian Couder
2011-09-07 11:29 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2011-09-07 18:07 ` Johannes Sixt
2011-09-08 1:23 ` Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:00 ` [PATCH v17 2/7] bisect: use && to connect statements that are deferred with eval Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:00 ` [PATCH v17 3/7] bisect: add tests to document expected behaviour in presence of broken trees Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:01 ` [PATCH v17 4/7] bisect: introduce support for --no-checkout option Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:01 ` [PATCH v17 5/7] bisect: introduce --no-checkout support into porcelain Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:01 ` [PATCH v17 6/7] bisect: add tests for the --no-checkout option Jon Seymour
2011-08-04 12:01 ` [PATCH v17 7/7] bisect: add documentation for " Jon Seymour
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7vobyw4mkv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily$(echo .)org \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=j6t@kdbg$(echo .)org \
--cc=jnareb@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=jon.seymour@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox