Hi, On 02/27/2016 07:03 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx> writes: > >> This command is also handy when you accidentally checked out another >> commit during a bisection. It computes the commit for the bisection >> and checks it out again. >> >> -->8-->8-->8-- >> >> Is that better? > > Thanks, I think it is definitely better than the original patch. > > I cannot say it is better than not having that extra paragraph, > though. Okay, I will remove that extra paragraph. However, it probably should be documented what "git bisect next" does after you've specified bad and good commits. For that, I'd like to have an extra informational paragraph. What about: "In general, the command computes the next commit for the bisection and checks it out." This would be neutral, in the meaning that no use case is involved. Another more "strict" choice could be to change the behavior such that "git bisect next" dies when invoked after a good (and a bad) commit is specified. In that case, there is no need to document the behavior ;-) However, in that case the name of "git bisect next" would be wrong... Cheers, Stephan -- 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