Re: [PATCH v10.1 7/7] bisect: allow any terms set by user

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 27, 2015, 04:51 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD0Zzjcc94qcUJOpfSrTej-o6hRKzZOuTufzAbOPkjUr_A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPc5daXSnovQPxR5kVoeRy4kApH7DiuTDvAz1ooQFp=5DZZg4Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 6:25 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 9:10 PM, Christian Couder
> <christian.couder@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> If we don't want to support positional arguments, then I would suggest
>> supporting first the following instead:
>>
>>          git bisect terms --name-good=fast --name-bad=slow
>>          git bisect terms --name-bad=slow --name-good=fast
>>
>> This would make the interface consistent with the code.
>
> Which somewhat defeats the point of introducing "old" and "new", though.
> The "terms" support is for people who feel that good/bad would be too confusing
> for the particular bisect session (e.g. because they are hunting for a fix).

Well if --name-old and --name-new are also available as synonyms, it would not be too bad I think. People could use the option names that fit their mental model or their use case better.

Show 12 quoted lines

>>> We may want to start supporting
>>>
>>>         git bisect start --new=master --old=maint
>>
>> Maybe we could also support:
>>
>> git bisect start --name-good=fast --name-bad=slow --fast=maint --slow=master
>
> The same comment for the token after --name-, but allowing the terms to be set
> at "start" could be a type-saver.  With need for added "--name-"
> prefix (worse, twice),
> I am not sure if it would be seen as a useful type-saver, though.

At least people don't need to remember if they have to use "git bisect term" before or after starting :-)