From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 384B0C433B4 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:20:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA2661446 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:20:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238725AbhD2IVQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:21:16 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:57070 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230071AbhD2IVO (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:21:14 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B966EB9CE1; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:20:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=yGAZhJcdZD4TuXx4lmxTW0zOzjnYsz8HbfORCx idKIU=; b=t4CslMqJhM5LsJBeAJCKtT+VAeLUwlRerFY9uQpBc8duDnyCQ5pygO cWBuPj8n0kZ2rg0mbeZVWwt1vtfB51NiguNm+Y/ar3TPsioAJ0jCYnU5zGBvFerw 8/wg8ltUygubWX5Gh2rr8yyhecALC5fF4Pu8nUt5Catm6onBBXirk= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0309B9CE0; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:20:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (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 40406B9CDE; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 04:20:27 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Christian Couder Cc: Bagas Sanjaya , git , Christian Couder , Pranit Bauva , Eric Sunshine , Ramsay Jones , Trygve Aaberge Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] t6030: add test for git bisect skip started with --term* arguments References: <20210429072451.38422-1-bagasdotme@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 17:20:26 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Christian Couder's message of "Thu, 29 Apr 2021 10:05:11 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: C0DE19D4-A8C3-11EB-9B70-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Christian Couder writes: > I am not sure how safe it is to use the hash of a commit that is in > seen but not yet in next. I suggested using "a previous commit" > instead as I thought that both the fix and this commit should be part > of the same branch, and then it would be obvious which commit it is. > Maybe we should wait for Junio to come back from vacation and decide > about this. It is totally unsafe. Besides, I do not think it is worth to make the fix and the test as two separate commits---can I ask you to help coordinate co-authorship between Ramsay and Bagas to come up with a combined single patch? Thanks.