Re: Marking commits as transitory for git bisect?

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

Just make sure that you state in the log message of the commits in the series something like:

 - The way the series is split for easier review has to break X and Y
   and this commit does not even compile;

 - This is the second half of restructuring, and it compiles again;

 - Now A is fully restructured, test X works again, but Y is still broken;

 - This finally completes the series and everything works again.

for _human consumption_. Bisect is not the only thing that needs to know about these commits that are intentionally broken. The reviewers and people who test before accepting the history with these commits in their history need to know about the known breakages, too.

Because you are talking about breakages that are _known_ when you make the series, you can afford to follow this recommendation. Object replacement mechanism is _not_ the answer---it's whole point is that you can add it as an afterthought by (virtually) squashing the series into one.

This way, the initial reviewers and a person who happened to hit such an intentionally broken commit during bisect can deal with the situation exactly the same way. I.e. with "git log".