From: Steffen Prohaska Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 06:40:56 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] user-manual: add advanced topic "bisecting merges" Message-ID: <16D3798E-5229-485D-9EC4-426625BAFEB2@zib.de> In-Reply-To: On Nov 7, 2007, at 11:16 PM, Benoit Sigoure wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > On Nov 7, 2007, at 10:50 PM, Steffen Prohaska wrote: > > Some more comments below. Sorry for not spotting these earlier. I'll took all your suggestions except for ... [...] >> +later when you have a better understanding of git. >> + >> +[[bisect-merges]] >> +Why bisecting merge commits can be harder than bisecting linear >> history >> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> ~~~ >> +The following text is based upon an email by Junio C. Hamano to >> +the git mailing list >> +(link:http://marc.info/?l=git&m=119403257315527&w=2[link:http:// >> marc.info/?l=git&m=119403257315527&w=2]). >> +It was slightly adapted for this manual. >> + >> +Bisecting merges can be challenging due to the complexity of >> +changes introduced at a merge. Bisecting through merges is not a > > s/at a merge/& point/ ? I'll replace the first sentence with Using gitlink:git-bisect[1] on a history with merges can be challenging. The details are explained in the remainder of the paragraph. [...] >> +added a new calling site for that function at commit Y. The >> +commits from Z leading to B all assume the old semantics of that >> +function and the callers and the callee are consistent with each >> +other. There is no bug at B, either. >> + >> +You merge to create C. There is no textual conflict with this >> +three way merge, and the result merges cleanly. You bisect >> +this, because you found D is bad and you know Z was good. Your >> +bisect will find that C (merge) is broken. Understandably so, >> +as at C, the new calling site of the function added by the lower >> +branch is not converted to the new semantics, while all the >> +other calling sites that already existed at Z would have been >> +converted by the merge. The new calling site has semantic >> +adjustment needed, but you do not know that yet. You need to > > s/adjustment/&s/ I'm not sure if plural is needed. Steffen -- Steffen Prohaska Zuse Institute Berlin, Takustraße 7, D-14195 Berlin-Dahlem, Germany +49 (30) 841 85-337, fax -107