From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Feature request: don't require both bad and good when bisecting Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 09:49:21 -0700 Message-ID: <7vobrsbkoe.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20120318212957.GS1219@chaosreigns.com> <4F67468B.4070502@op5.se> <20120319153006.GD24848@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4F675DD3.3040004@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jeff King , darxus@chaosreigns.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Ericsson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 19 17:49:31 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S9flx-0005AA-QJ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:49:30 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161976Ab2CSQtZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:49:25 -0400 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:60466 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030563Ab2CSQtY (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:49:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 977717628; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:49:23 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=+U8t9GSVHzAmxeAJOzaoEG7o0Yo=; b=RlSXfQ w3SRO8YBZ3qO3Y5Fea+rkm6vCT+k8qmhyjrR16SftoYlciq3QdjQ3j9Y76L3oJJT xOaCXgWo8sIiVBPaMjqX76xsbo3iHCGcc9zVX2TV5EryAbr3aO51a+GYha9VhqVE PHDCNeHTz4k1QRi63xk57GujrO2ydzjaYq1qw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wO+/MIEbwH7K0uurc7bAtQy/t+J5UGjG GvM6R0lgHZxOTlct4jmZE0NYNTm8vH2JMuA3vRAH0K4VeRgTmbgFrs/27YHyRssi gp8Fjdv2RoWHhgE8MExgLM2so2qDa6Px+HuoJ8Aq2emiXDiEczIvx3TqPv3yVLnF NS7cHq9Ndps= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3207627; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:49:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B9D117626; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:49:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <4F675DD3.3040004@op5.se> (Andreas Ericsson's message of "Mon, 19 Mar 2012 17:24:51 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 7AB07324-71E3-11E1-850C-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andreas Ericsson writes: > It's sort of beside the point though. Using git as experiment (again), > we're looking at less than 30000 revisions and 289 non-rc tags. With only > 30k revisions, you'll do *worse* testing 15 tags sequentially than you > would by just letting the bisection machinery get on with it and use > the full history as base for bisection. I think you are missing the primary point in what Jeff said. It does not matter if you inspect increasingly older versions based on exponentially longer strides or if you test tagged releases. What matters is to making intelligent determination after seeing a failure, between the failure due to "the feature being tested did not even exist" and "the feature when introduced was good but at this commit it is broken".