Re: [PATCH 3/4] bisect: simplify the add of new bisect terms
- From
- Louis-Alexandre Stuber <stuberl@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
- Date
- Jun 10, 2015, 07:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1926405730.374352.1433920537226.JavaMail.zimbra@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq1thkwg5r.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
> That is very different from ENOENT, which is an expected error when > you are not using a customized terms.
But in the current state, we are going to create bisect_terms even if the bisection is in bad/good mode. Should we differentiate the erors then ? and should we abort the bisection instead of doing it in bad/good mode by default ?