From: Torstein Hegge
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bisect: Store first bad commit as comment in log file
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 00:20:58 +0200
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 14:13:00 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Torstein Hegge writes:
>>
>> > I took another look at this. I was
Torstein Hegge writes:
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 14:13:00 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Torstein Hegge writes:
>>
>> > I took another look at this. I wasn't able to come up with anything
>> > useful for the "The merge base $rev is bad" case, but for the "only
>> > skipped commits left to test
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 14:13:00 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Torstein Hegge writes:
>
> > I took another look at this. I wasn't able to come up with anything
> > useful for the "The merge base $rev is bad" case, but for the "only
> > skipped commits left to test" case one could do something li
Torstein Hegge writes:
> I took another look at this. I wasn't able to come up with anything
> useful for the "The merge base $rev is bad" case, but for the "only
> skipped commits left to test" case one could do something like this.
We skipped them because we can gain _no_ information from test
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:53:39 +0200, Torstein Hegge wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 06:38:09 +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> > I wonder if we should also write something into the bisect log if for
> > example the bisection stopped because there are only 'skip'ped commits
> > left to test. But
Torstein Hegge writes:
> I was wondering why "git grep show-ref *.sh" gave so few users. It looks
> like rev-parse is more common.
It is primarily because show-ref is slightly newer. When you have a
full refname (e.g. refs/bisect/bad) and not an arbitrary object name
that is spelled in a random
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 06:38:09 +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> I wonder if we should also write something into the bisect log if for
> example the bisection stopped because there are only 'skip'ped commits
> left to test. But maybe this could go into another patch after this
> one.
Yes, that wo
Torstein Hegge writes:
> When bisect successfully finds a single revision, the first bad commit
> should be shown to human readers of 'git bisect log'.
>
> This resolves the apparent disconnect between the bisection result and
> the log when a bug reporter says "I know that the first bad commit i
From: Torstein Hegge
Subject: [PATCH] bisect: Store first bad commit as comment in log file
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 17:22:57 +0200
> When bisect successfully finds a single revision, the first bad commit
> should be shown to human readers of 'git bisect log'.
>
> This
When bisect successfully finds a single revision, the first bad commit
should be shown to human readers of 'git bisect log'.
This resolves the apparent disconnect between the bisection result and
the log when a bug reporter says "I know that the first bad commit is
$rev, as you can see from $(git
10 matches
Mail list logo