From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] bisect: teach "skip" to accept a range using "-r|--range" option Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 00:24:25 -0800 Message-ID: <7vej0ttydi.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20081130071511.e279e8bc.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Johannes Sixt , git@vger.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Nov 30 09:26:17 2008 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 1L6hd9-0007Px-QX for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 09:26:16 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750956AbYK3IY7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:24:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750973AbYK3IY7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:24:59 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:59341 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750929AbYK3IY6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:24:58 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34BB982032; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:24:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1C91882031; Sun, 30 Nov 2008 03:24:27 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20081130071511.e279e8bc.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> (Christian Couder's message of "Sun, 30 Nov 2008 07:15:11 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5F3C4E10-BEB8-11DD-86C3-465CC92D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Christian Couder writes: > Junio wrote: > > > > Although I fully realize that the established semantics of A..B in git is > > bottom-exclusive, top-inclusive, and this suggestion breaks the UI > > uniformity by deviating from that convention, I have to wonder if it would > > be more useful if you let the bottom commit (A in your example) also be > > skipped. > > I agree that it would be perhaps more usefull to skip the bottom commit. Actually I do not think it is such a big deal to warrant more code and complexity. "skip A..B A", if you really wanted to, would work anyway.