From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 5/5] bisect: allow any terms set by user Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:23:45 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1435064084-5554-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> <1435159062-23468-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> <1435159062-23468-6-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, antoine.delaite@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr, louis--alexandre.stuber@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr, chriscool@tuxfamily.org, thomasxnguy@gmail.com, valentinduperray@gmail.com, Louis Stuber To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 24 23:23:58 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Z7s9F-00059A-RR for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:23:58 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750981AbbFXVXx (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:23:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.imag.fr ([129.88.30.5]:49721 "EHLO shiva.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750868AbbFXVXw (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 17:23:52 -0400 Received: from clopinette.imag.fr (clopinette.imag.fr [129.88.34.215]) by shiva.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5OLNhCo022022 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:23:43 +0200 Received: from anie.imag.fr (anie.imag.fr [129.88.7.32]) by clopinette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t5OLNjQq002744; Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:23:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 24 Jun 2015 10:46:01 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0.1 (shiva.imag.fr [129.88.30.5]); Wed, 24 Jun 2015 23:23:43 +0200 (CEST) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: t5OLNhCo022022 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1435785824.82466@tUN7cbYX6dO1ZEgLZqre7w Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano writes: > they would call "term2" into "term1" somewhere. e.g. > > -ancestors of term1. > +ancestors of term1. For example, if something was buggy in > +the old part of the history, you know somewhere the bug was > +fixed, and you want to find the exact commit that fixed it, > +you may want to say `git bisect terms fixed broken`; this > +way, you would mark a commit that still has the bug with > +`broken`, and a newer one after the fix with `fixed`. > > or something? Yes. > I am wondering (together with the documentation patch) if it would > be better to be more explicit, instead of term[12], like this: > > git bisect terms new old Yes. I eliminated all instance of term1 and term2 in the doc of the patch, and replaced with and . >> +bisect_terms () { >> + case "$#" in >> + 0) >> + if test -s "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" >> + then >> + { >> + read term1 >> + read term2 >> + }<"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_TERMS" >> + gettextln "Your current terms are $term1 and $term2." > > The same comment on this part. Instead of "git bisect terms" that > just says "You are using $term1 and $term2", the users would benefit > if it said "You are using $term1 for newer state and $term2 for > older state" [*1*]. Done. It's up to date on https://github.com/moy/git/tree/bisect-terms Will resend. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/