From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [NON-TOY PATCH] git bisect: introduce 'fixed' and 'unfixed' Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:26:55 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20080624163810.GA4654@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20080624174157.GB9500@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 24 21:29:55 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 1KBEDD-0001aE-7P for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2008 21:29:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753227AbYFXT26 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:28:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752934AbYFXT26 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:28:58 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:46009 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752779AbYFXT25 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:28:57 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 24 Jun 2008 19:28:55 -0000 Received: from almond.st-and.ac.uk (EHLO almond.st-and.ac.uk) [138.251.155.241] by mail.gmx.net (mp051) with SMTP; 24 Jun 2008 21:28:55 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX192qeQEgox2YYDvWRK+/xXA/OszJPGlnkQCoqIOmL qJannYbHyN+zAv X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > On Tue, 24 Jun 2008, Jeff King wrote: > > > On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 06:09:28PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > And this is my first attempt at a proper patch for it. > > > > > > Now with documentation, and hopefully all places where the > > > user is being told about a "bad" commit. > > > > This looks reasonably sane to me. The only thing I can think of that > > we're missing is that "git bisect visualize" will still show the refs as > > "bisect/bad" and "bisect/good". > > > > To fix that, you'd have to ask people to start the bisect by saying "I > > am bisecting to find a fix, not a breakage." And then you could change > > the refnames and all of the messages as appropriate. > > That would also be a good way of taking care of the problem where someone > gets distracted while running a slow test, forgets what they're looking > for, and marks the result as "bad" instead of "unfixed". Feel free to rework my patch. Ciao, Dscho