From: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Nov 2007 09:11:40 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] user-manual: add advanced topic "bisecting merges"
Message-ID: <4732D2CC.1010008@viscovery.net>
In-Reply-To: <6E62E205-0951-4CCB-A807-AC107E40ACE1@zib.de>

Steffen Prohaska schrieb:
> 
> On Nov 8, 2007, at 8:19 AM, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> 
>> Steffen Prohaska schrieb:
>>> +If you linearize the history by rebasing the lower branch on
>>> +top of the upper, instead of merging, the bug becomes much easier to
>>> +find and understand.  Your history would instead be:
>>
>> At this point I'm missing the words
>>
>>     The solution is ...
>>
>> I.e.:
>>
>> The solution is to linearize the history by rebasing the lower branch on
>> top of the upper, instead of merging. Now the bug becomes much easier to
>> find and understand.  Your history would instead be:
> 
> Hmm. It might be a solution if you did not publish history.

This is about finding the commit that introduced a bug. Once you found it, 
better: you know how to fix the bug, you are expected to throw away the 
rebased branch, not to publish it! Maybe a note along these lines could be 
appended:

Now that you know what caused the error (and how to fix it), throw away the 
rebased branch, and commit a fix on top of D.

-- Hannes