From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) (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 3DD2F181313 for ; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 19:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712777504; cv=none; b=j+mCuKR0LH/Gjjw/aBfdl9VDEc0qTBvSRHnIvtEPYAzSfJqTzHgOSuUs9t9aTCwyeh21F+j0jm4girXtWXNcyAQvr2WOYYftkAtMyzaKvKxbkNm0YJdZgyrwfqHmXMLVNDRH74jUnk3um2vdNlu4rBvzUIxHHv31+b6vYCtArWQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712777504; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OX6fNnoGzXijkbeHx1EzSwTQ+bSqLhEe1BkNr07m6P0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=XNShh89vAS+9/S6uEgM48V3ejxni1JVpLiwqlSDEdHXmvCNvl5G12tMFAdJm2u+d4tzuRtuXNW1OwdbfC1Ya578yb6fgr3dy36vMOTshjxh1zTGbqNFA2brDhQkqRP3JRgowYRwqHl09T/TRqJEBdCOUShfvGb+yDQshyuLiiH4= 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=CyFwXJQg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.52 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="CyFwXJQg" Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC0430B04; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:31:42 -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=OX6fNnoGzXijkbeHx1EzSwTQ+bSqLhEe1BkNr0 7m6P0=; b=CyFwXJQgpl1iDP73MoEIE/jSR0KNNh+I0EuU7OCycH2aYhZOtMPJuP uFo1sr2CHa64jwJFbhTg0MqW6UHKzVPjj1GHiddN+AXvP7XOgeY2Fpa0rSxumonO yShsCgXzTyV41saRhs2v11nJ4qvxxrbCOxXUMUFqknd94+qMo+VnA= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A673030B03; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:31:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.229.118]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3310C30B00; Wed, 10 Apr 2024 15:31:39 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Olliver Schinagl Cc: phillip.wood123@gmail.com, phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk, git@vger.kernel.org, Christian Couder , Stefan Haller Subject: Re: [RFC] bisect: Introduce skip-when to automatically skip commits In-Reply-To: (Olliver Schinagl's message of "Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:22:31 +0200") References: <20240330081026.362962-2-oliver@schinagl.nl> <864b0f22-b07b-469b-8fc2-56940fd89a8b@schinagl.nl> <4bedcad2-218a-4b16-88a7-cc70cc126af3@gmail.com> <6dd4a5a4-9999-4c04-a854-09fc238c91bb@schinagl.nl> <2542ebd6-11ce-496b-b10b-b55c3a211705@schinagl.nl> <116dd27e-2e30-4915-a131-6c71c999fccd@schinagl.nl> Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2024 12:31:37 -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: F3B617C2-F770-11EE-A834-F515D2CDFF5E-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Olliver Schinagl writes: > See, the hook is named 'post-checkout' and thus, it runs after > checkout has been performed. So we are now on the 'broken' commit we > do not want to test, git should have skipped this already, and not > checked it out. You are not the only user of this feature (by the way, do not call this a "hook". It should be per "git bisect" session) and others may need to actually inspect their working tree state before being able to say "nah, I do not want to test this version, please give me another one" by exiting with 125. That is why post-checkout is more useful in general. Contrasted with that, a check that happens before the checkout is useful only in a much narrower "I can tell by looking only at the commit object name" use case, which I would not be interested in seeing. Thanks.