From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFAAD3D555 for ; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:42:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711316539; cv=none; b=twDxAEoN7rBn4Bw0LtjPqgD7Im3p/R2mY9kdHgB3UYpweRdSyuTXkq558dlwzs1gmqor22xP9iAwlGo7OmSkfgXWr76Ru320HXkkLRs25UQFw0KGJj29/BFYABlGOdkF5CfUO5qMzrp4TaY+gliEKxrHu/bBGxjytumTxZMbEno= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711316539; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0rcPzPyIw7RvxzfU8QotNRsCY59dqPTLqik4In9Qi+k=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=uAyxh1rgeypKJIZZT5p/9luG5NjlxIbZG3oVbygg1mXFFmHL04dguK775YarK9k9X4mt9/lXbozcycJtWCYTfyaNfMno54aLUI7cmIY4IozYsulXbgUj+dQcp5WYzrOBuotSpZkLrh3RatgSrCszfRPtblMA5jCouqicKKM78CI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=Wn3lvhqZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=64.147.108.71 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="Wn3lvhqZ" Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C43921E10AD; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:42:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=0rcPzPyIw7RvxzfU8QotNRsCY59dqPTLqik4In 9Qi+k=; b=Wn3lvhqZKj6pbypVmBC6GYetUvSzdF3YFTWibgftoFh0IZEbzwr+C4 zglJgvniIlPd1efG289QRAHte2KD1RS1RGhCQ+Zy2MYjlgb818130QgpkWkzZ2EZ O2Gbj6Oefr9rfqLsD03kCS//bzoMTdp0jG8BQpDTy8KMabpECqLtQ= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBBF31E10AB; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:42:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 318731E10AA; Sun, 24 Mar 2024 17:42:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Christian Couder Cc: Philippe Blain , Git mailing list Subject: Re: 'git bisect run' not fully automatic when a merge base must be tested In-Reply-To: (Christian Couder's message of "Sun, 24 Mar 2024 18:57:48 +0100") References: <6ee4b8d8-5acb-3d3c-28e0-be972945e8d7@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2024 14:42:08 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5DBA92D0-EA27-11EE-AC37-25B3960A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Christian Couder writes: > I think the merge bases should only be checked at the beginning of a > bisection. So it is strange that it happened so late after it was > started. Using cherry-pick to alter the shape of the history being bisected may confuse the algorithm to find the next step to test. But if it is not "confused" but "due to dynamic expansion of the search space, we ended up in a forked history that requires a merge-base test" that is a legitimate condition, then I tend to agree with Philippe that it should be automatically tested during "bisect run".