From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46DE2013A for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 21:27:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752498AbdBOV07 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:26:59 -0500 Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:34097 "EHLO mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752505AbdBOV06 (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Feb 2017 16:26:58 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f65.google.com with SMTP id v184so12088973pgv.1 for ; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:26:58 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=dX6huoZEPXLhekhlsRq4T/Jh8eqY/R+LsHaiWpO/WKM=; b=BL71H2M4ZH7/DCPHsRoauzPiDyFcMcj9zk0NeJ7f3nvOWiUxV5IEIotm0Uxg1VmuMJ kKNLQNaPcqF/+YMeQnkN00ctbG1QP5xkssiJoAXoRDc+wJl/ZBAoze1OYoEpeADLJluZ g6XVQT6KusSH6TXAeQ5SQsdEuZt4xcdmdyjCUrbYntqWvPmv2RCejq6gMEvisiR+DR0E XuqtPIMFwcD4IZ6DUpt3J8gRfmsj/30aJBowaaa0Yvh7h7uV1KBkIlsabEI7abvDtgtB cnwfE3UgCWqeiYKHTqJ7l2Q9P9iFDV7ygVv0+wbqFEFZaVE6Tqz9gWDIPhTa4gLAt17F QqYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=dX6huoZEPXLhekhlsRq4T/Jh8eqY/R+LsHaiWpO/WKM=; b=ZKuGEOHZevXVzvXL+jiQ5yLTHAAe0fisWpWO4kkOiwMpr5hLMmu7G0hyjwCUKhoCVu 0D/0NM2+IVGSFKAZaQD4cKrfAipp9zJN3Xq81jAkP5G+agpiU9fpI0JY+4eJCDLqQFVe Ao+WSfU+pxD8aEcZ9ljutQqts0omq+gcgK2TYk3bNlQztLPqOa2ODO89tMRdxf7EF2uN lGUUJ73e1eR507K0cfzvt5BnTG8JbGs4LhP3lSK9YZTnq/YlqloESBYncvX39YIfs00X VbC57w2MTmxBXgZFMh/qBfz5nBdaF5zDBXNKUmkCqFJJNKt7zFrTgj4tbPtlpGBLxEsS rNXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mv4JJJXIfPkcotak9CY6TN8rUUaDPFUnaNk9FCeZLTLgTOaWBtqmhVmaK0VmAgFQ== X-Received: by 10.98.91.131 with SMTP id p125mr39942033pfb.165.1487194017241; Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:26:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:3551:31c7:1fe1:8b9b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f188sm9241803pfa.35.2017.02.15.13.26.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:26:56 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Philip Oakley" Cc: "Christian Couder" , "Johannes Schindelin" , , "git" Subject: Re: [git-for-windows] Re: Continuous Testing of Git on Windows References: <7EA15219331242ABB08B9A9AA9F08CBE@PhilipOakley> Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:26:55 -0800 In-Reply-To: <7EA15219331242ABB08B9A9AA9F08CBE@PhilipOakley> (Philip Oakley's message of "Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:31:07 -0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.91 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Philip Oakley" writes: > In the next..pu case the abstraction is in the other direction, we > have potentially multiple points of infection (from feature branches), > and a broad test (the whole test suite). In this case I believe we > would like to investigate initially the --first-parent line with a > classic bisect for the first point of failure (obviously including > feature branch merges). This would identify which feature merge, or > regular commit, created the first breakage. If you are going first-parent, you would limit the bisection to a single-strand-of-pearls, and I agree that it is a good strategy to find which topic branch merge broke the tip of 'pu'. If we assume that there is no funny interaction among topics that cancel a breakage brought in by one topic with another breakage by another topic, then no matter how many broken topics there are, I agree that we would get to the first broken topic. A good thing that comes once we assume that topics are more-or-less independent is that we could rebuild 'pu' minus the broken topic identified by the above procedure and repeat it to find other broken topics, still using the --first-parent bisection, because master..pu is a linear sequence of merges of individual topics.