Hey Stephan,
On Sun, Jan 1, 2017 at 9:57 PM, Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> int cmd_bisect__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>>>> @@ -643,6 +794,10 @@ int cmd_bisect__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>>>> N_("print out the bisect terms"), BISECT_TERMS),
>>>> OPT_CMDMODE(0, "bisect-start", &cmdmode,
>>>> N_("start the bisect session"), BISECT_START),
>>>> + OPT_CMDMODE(0, "bisect-next", &cmdmode,
>>>> + N_("find the next bisection commit"), BISECT_NEXT),
>>>> + OPT_CMDMODE(0, "bisect-auto-next", &cmdmode,
>>>> + N_("verify the next bisection state then find the next bisection state"), BISECT_AUTO_NEXT),
>>>
>>> The next bisection *state* is found?
>>
>> checkout is more appropriate. I don't remember why I used "find".
>
> "checkout the next bisection commit" maybe?
Seems better. Thanks!
Regards,
Pranit Bauva