On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 11:23 PM, Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Pranit, > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Pranit Bauva <pranit.bauva@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 12:48 PM, Johannes Schindelin >> <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hi Pranit, >>> >>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2016, Pranit Bauva wrote: >>> >>>> I could first move individual functions to bisect--helper.c. >>> >>> My suggestion would be to give it a try already with some functionality >>> you deem small enough to move to the bisect--helper within a day or so. It >>> is always good to test the waters like that, and to include this early >>> work in the proposal, also to assess (and to let the reviewers assess) how >>> feasible the project is. >> >> Sure! I will start with check_term_format(). >> >> Also, I think implementing a new algorithm for bisect along with this >> would be too big for a GSoC project > > Yeah, I also think so. > >> and I am no algorithm expert. I >> will stick to --first-parent along with incremental rewrite. > > My opinion is that an incremental rewrite by itself is big enough for > a GSoC. And it might be difficult to do something else that is bisect > related at the same time. So if you want to do the rewrite, just focus > on it. If you ever have some time left we will easily find other > interesting bisect related improvements. I just realised it after I finished rewriting a simple function. I will send that patch. It would be much better on doing one thing properly. > If you really want to do "--first-parent" then you should probably add > "Improve git bisect terms" to it in your proposal. -- 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