Junio C Hamano wrote: > * Can we have *no* rev that is marked as "good"? I think we made > it possible to say "my time is more valuable than machine cycles, > so I'll only tell you that this revision is broken and give you > no limit on the bottom side of the history. still assume that > there was only one good-to-bad transition in the history and find > it" by supplying only one "bad" and no "good" when starting to > bisect. And in such a case, ... Hm, this addition might be an unpleasant special-case syntax, breaking both `git bisect start [bad [good]]` and `git bisect bad ...; git bisect start`. R.
