From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH] bisect reset: Allow resetting to any commit, not just a branch Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:45:23 +0200 Message-ID: <4AD42203.6030802@viscovery.net> References: <7vr5t8coex.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vaazw6uyi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Anders Kaseorg , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 13 08:53:47 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MxbGR-0006nV-TP for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:53:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758820AbZJMGqD (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:46:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756595AbZJMGqD (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:46:03 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:56333 "EHLO lilzmailso01.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752023AbZJMGqC (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Oct 2009 02:46:02 -0400 Received: from cpe228-254.liwest.at ([81.10.228.254] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso01.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Mxb8O-0004tV-78; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:45:24 +0200 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.95]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34DE9614; Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:45:23 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) In-Reply-To: <7vaazw6uyi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano schrieb: > I would understand it, if not agreeing that I also am often in that > situation myself", if somebody does not even care which commit he was on > before starting the bisection, but knows (or is willing to decide at that > point) which branch (or even a specific commit, while still being > detached) he wants to switch to. And it would make sense to avoid an > extra checkout that snaps back to the pre-bisection commit before > switching to the new state he has chosen. The situation that I'm faced quite frequently is that after I find a regression, I cannot tell which released version did not have the breakage. Hence, the first thing I have to do is to find a good commit. Therefore, I jump around in ancient history until I find a good commit. Then I start bisect. I certainly do NOT want to be warped back to this ancient commit by 'bisect reset'. -- Hannes