Re: [PATCH v14 5/8] bisect: introduce --no-checkout support into porcelain.
- From
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
- Date
- Aug 3, 2011, 05:28 UTC
- Message-ID
- <201108030728.42453.chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vk4avcsk9.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Wednesday 03 August 2011 01:16:54 Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> > Having said that, other than these minor nits, I think this round is > almost ready. I didn't check how it behaves upon "bisect reset", > though. It shouldn't touch the index, HEAD nor the working tree (it > probably is just the matter of "update-ref -d BISECT_HEAD" and nothing > else, but I haven't thought things through thoroughly). > > Further polishing we may want to do while it is still in pu/next I can > think of off the top of my head are: > > - In this mode, I can bisect the history even inside a bare repository, > as the whole point of --no-checkout is that the mode does not require a > working tree. I however suspect "git bisect" requires working tree. Is > this something we want to fix? > > - Further, perhaps should we default to this mode inside a bare > repository?
I agree that it would be nice if it worked in a bare repo. I did not look at that yet.
> Christian, do you think of anything else?
No, I agree that it looks almost ready.
The few improvements I would like are:
- squashing the last patch into the previous ones, - using a bisect_mode() function when needed.
> Also do you see flaws in our > reasoning that updating only BISECT_HEAD and doing nothing else is a good > way to do this?
No, I agree that --no-checkout is a good idea and that using only BISECT_HEAD is good way to do this.
Thanks, Christian.