Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> To be bluntly honest, I think the current one is sufficient as a >> good-enough default. The first thing I would do after seeing that >> message is to either "git checkout <commit-object-name>" or "git >> show <commit-object-name>", and the current full 40-hex output gives >> me an easier mouse-double-click target than the proposed abbreviated >> one, so in that sense the original proposal may even be a usability >> regression. > > Yeah, it might also be a regression if some users have scripts that > depend on the current behavior. > ... >> It is tempting to say that the output can be eliminated by always >> checking out the first-bad-commit (i.e. only when the last answer >> that led to the first-bad decision was "good", do a "git checkout" >> of that bad commit), but in a project where a branch switching is >> not instantaneous, that might be problematic (unless the first step >> the user would have done is to check it out anyway, of course). > > Yeah, and speaking of regressions, elimiting the output might be a > more serious regression. I am getting somewhat annoyed by this line of thought. Who said bisect output is meant to be parseable and be read by scripts in the first place? If that were the case, we wouldn't be having this discussion thread in the first place. -- 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