Re: Feature request: don't require both bad and good when bisecting

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andreas Ericsson <ae@xxxxxx> writes:

> It's sort of beside the point though. Using git as experiment (again),
> we're looking at less than 30000 revisions and 289 non-rc tags. With only
> 30k revisions, you'll do *worse* testing 15 tags sequentially than you
> would by just letting the bisection machinery get on with it and use
> the full history as base for bisection.

I think you are missing the primary point in what Jeff said.

It does not matter if you inspect increasingly older versions based on
exponentially longer strides or if you test tagged releases. What matters
is to making intelligent determination after seeing a failure, between the
failure due to "the feature being tested did not even exist" and "the
feature when introduced was good but at this commit it is broken".

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]