From: Louis-Alexandre Stuber <stuberl@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 07:15:37 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] bisect: simplify the add of new bisect terms
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 ?