From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFE] allow git bisect to figure out in which revision a bug was fixed Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2009 18:08:41 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4ot5zfqe.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vfxcpdbsh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090721202848.GA3453@localhost.localdomain> <7vprbtbwhu.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Josef Bacik , Jeff Moyer , git@vger.kernel.org To: Nicolas Pitre X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 22 03:09:01 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MTQKI-0002Zp-9k for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2009 03:08:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753483AbZGVBIu (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:08:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752400AbZGVBIt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:08:49 -0400 Received: from a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com ([64.74.157.62]:61755 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751220AbZGVBIt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:08:49 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D727CD864; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:08:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37399D861; Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:08:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Nicolas Pitre's message of "Tue\, 21 Jul 2009 20\:35\:52 -0400 \(EDT\)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3657C220-765C-11DE-B4B7-AEF1826986A2-77302942!a-pb-sasl-sd.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre writes: > Why not simply automatically inverting the meaning of good and > bad based on which commit is the ancestor of the other initially? Because neither may be an ancestor of the other?