From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Feature request: git bisect merge to usable base
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2016 14:38:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqfuydm0lr.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALCETrV_JAEbuU3v+V352_8PVyaB1noGQAfJG+HVVanVpUbRZw@mail.gmail.com> (Andy Lutomirski's message of "Mon, 4 Jan 2016 14:20:50 -0800")
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net> writes:
> Anyway, the idea of merging test commits up to some lowest common
> denominator seems generally useful to me, and the idea of specifying a
> 'prepare the checked-out tree' (as you suggested, where 'git merge
> --no-commit whatever' would be specified) would also be handy, and
> both of these are useful even in cases where git bisect run isn't
> being used.
Yes, I didn't mean to say "bisect run" is always great. What I was
hinting at was that even if you are _not_ using "bisect run" (which
almost always _requires_ you to write a small script that does the
test and says yes/no), once you start working on a project that is
sufficiently complex (like bisecting a regression in the Linux
kernel), your procedure to build and test a single revision becomes
complex enough that it is worth to write and use a small script for
a single step _anyway_. And with that in mind, "how do I prepare
the checked-out tree for building and testing" can be part of that
script.
Which in turn means there is nothing to add to "bisect", not even
the "--fixup my_fixup_script" I alluded to, let alone "--merge-to"
that is way too specific to the case you happened to have had before
you sent your message.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-04 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-30 10:40 Feature request: git bisect merge to usable base Andy Lutomirski
2015-12-30 18:54 ` Christian Couder
2015-12-30 20:09 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-01-04 18:15 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-04 20:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-01-04 22:20 ` Andy Lutomirski
2016-01-04 22:38 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqfuydm0lr.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).