Re: [PATCH v2] bisect: improve output when bad commit is found

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: May 13, 2015, 09:39 UTC
Message-ID: <CAP8UFD14LuyaVcoNHxR00ZeGgHWXbuW_QdVf4YqZWzgMdufUjQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150513013637.GB3066@peff.net>

On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 3:36 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 06:13:48PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> >> See $gmane/268881
>> >
>> > Well, technically he just said it might be that people are parsing the
>> > output and could be broken, but if you'd rather not take that risk then
>> > I guess we just have to leave things the way they are.
>>
>> FWIW.
>>
>>  - I personally do not agree that those who scripted around "git
>>    bisect" (as opposed to those who wrote scripts to be driven by
>>    the "bisect run" interface) are worth worrying about.  But I am
>>    not the whole of the Git world ;-)
>
> It is not clear to me that people are actually scripting around the
> output. Between the exit code and the stable output in BISECT_LOG, that
> seems like a much more preferable way for scripted uses to find out what
> happened.
>
> Of course, that is not a guarantee that nobody scraped stderr, but at
> least it makes me feel better that they're Doing It Wrong. :)

Aren't we sending the "XXXX is the first bad commit" and the diff-tree to stdout?