Re: git bisect problems/ideas

>>> Yeah, many people find it difficult to reverse the meaning of "bad"
>>> and "good" when looking for a fix. There were some suggestions at some
>>> points to do something about it. Some of the suggestions were to use
>>> some aliases for "good" and "bad", but there was no agreement. Other
>>> suggestions had a patch attached but the patch was not good enough or
>>> something.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, the restriction is that the "bad" commit cannot be an ancestor
>>> of a "good" commit. But the "good" commits need not be all ancestors
>>> of the "bad" commit. For example if you have a "master" branch and a
>>> "dev" branch that was forked from the "master" branch at one point,
>>> like that:
>>> 
>>> A-B-C-D-E <-- master
>>>     \F-G <-- dev
>>> 
>> 
>> I don't understand how this can only be one way?  Isn't this symmetric?  In
>> other words, how is it different from
>> 
>> A-B-C-D-E <-- dev
>>    \F-G <-- master
>> 
>> as far as bisect is concerned? Or maybe I am not entirely clear on what you
>> are saying.
> 
> Yes, it is symmetric, so we cannot just automatically reverse the
> meanning because there is no "after" or "before" relationship between
> "dev" and "master".
> 
> Best regards,
> Christian.