From: Aaron S. Meurer <asmeurer@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:27:20 GMT
Subject: Re: git bisect problems/ideas
Message-ID: <DFADB509-B086-4BF3-AB3B-B19CB68FA113@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20110117115133.GA29207@burratino>

On Jan 17, 2011, at 4:51 AM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> Aaron S. Meurer wrote:
>
>>> 90% of the time I do not
>>> want to go back to where I started bisecting.  I would much prefer  
>>> to just
>>> have a git bisect stop command
> [which does "git bisect reset HEAD"]
>
> FWIW I like the idea.  I end up using "git bisect reset" by accident
> from time to time and it is almost never what I want, especially
> after working on something else for a few days[1].
>

Things never get quite that bad for me brcause I gave the git_ps1 in  
my $PS1, so it tells me when I am bisecting and so I never forget to  
reset soon after I am done.  Ditto for am.

Aaron Meurer

> My only worry is that it could be confusing --- what if a person,
> intending to run "git bisect reset", runs "git bisect stop" instead?
> To mitigate that, the stop subcommand could print the name of the
> start commit so such a user knows what to check out to get back to
> a familiar state.
>
> Christian Couder wrote:
>
>> Yeah, many people find it difficult to reverse the meaning of "bad"
>> and "good" when looking for a fix. There were some suggestions at  
>> some
>> points to do something about it. Some of the suggestions were to use
>> some aliases for "good" and "bad", but there was no agreement. Other
>> suggestions had a patch attached but the patch was not good enough or
>> something.
>
> Any pointers to such a discussion or patch?  Maybe whatever small
> detail caused it to be forgotten could be fixed...
>
> Ciao,
> Jonathan
>
> [1] compare am --abort:
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/164002