From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] git-what: explain what to do next Date: Wed, 28 May 2008 22:09:46 -0700 Message-ID: <7vlk1tpug5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1211877299-27255-1-git-send-email-sbejar@gmail.com> <200805290639.38134.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Santi =?utf-8?Q?B=C3=A9jar?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Christian Couder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 29 07:11:39 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 1K1aQL-0001yo-3v for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 29 May 2008 07:11:37 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750913AbYE2FKB (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 01:10:01 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751025AbYE2FKB (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 01:10:01 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:55035 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750873AbYE2FKA (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 01:10:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD4A23BC3; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:09:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (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 ESMTP id 15DFF3BC2; Thu, 29 May 2008 01:09:55 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <200805290639.38134.chriscool@tuxfamily.org> (Christian Couder's message of "Thu, 29 May 2008 06:39:38 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7C8ED72E-2D3D-11DD-BB66-80001473D85F-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: > 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.